2015-05-11 12:15 GMT+02:00 stepharo <stepharo@free.fr>:
Yes this is important we should think modularly.
This is one of my issues when dealing with configurations: the need to copy them in many different places (the MetaRepo for each supported pharo version, the Smalltalkhub repo for the project, github, etc....). Now, I write a configuration once and for all, and that configuration delegates to baselines which are hosted in branch or version specific repositories (one repo if github, multiple repositories if smalltalkhub). Metacello/Git inspired workflow ;) Thierry
Le 10/5/15 18:45, Sean P. DeNigris a écrit :
For example, Soup's config was updated to declare a stable version for
4.0. It was committed to MetaRepoForPharo40, but not to PharoExtras/Soup. It was confusing that loading from the config browser worked, but loading via another config as a dependent project did not (since we use the canonical repo in that use case).
Specifically, I am asking that if we update a config, and it's not Pharo xyz-specific (i.e. may break other platforms), that we commit back to the canonical repo or notify the maintainer if we don't have repo access. This policy would obviously be especially easy for any project owned by the Pharo team.
Thanks :)
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Request-Feed-MetaRepoForXyz-Configs-Back-to-Projects-t... Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.