On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 5:28 PM, St�phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:

On Dec 23, 2009, at 5:17 PM, Adrian Kuhn wrote:

> Yanni Chiu <yanni@...> writes:
>
>>> � � Gofer it
>>> � � � � � � squeaksource: 'akuhn';
>>> � � � � � � package: 'SUnit';
>>> � � � � � � package: 'SUnitGUI';
>>> � � � � � � load
>>
>> Is it too late to call it SUnit2, SUnit3, whatever?
>
> Too early in my opinion :)
>
> I follow the github style of forking, ie "fork early, fork often". The name of
> a fork is qualified by prefixing it with the name of the forker, so my fork is
> qualified "akuhn/SUnit". IMHO it is early enough to think about a new name
> when it is (ever?) merged back into Pharo. Phunit might be nice.
>
> @stef that might make a nice feature for new package system: to tell in an
> immediately visible way from which repo a package/class is coming.

The problem is that you can have multiple repos.
Now RPackage is disconnect orthogonal to MC and repo it is just a couple of classes
to replace packageInfo.

>> What happens is that people start writing test cases assuming the newer
>> version. Then at some point there's a conflict, and you either have to
>> re-write your old or your new test cases. Maybe it's okay to be forced
>> to update your old test cases, but it would be good know which version
>> of the "SUnit API" is available or required.
>
> Good point, I share your concern. Maybe something like
>
> � �self assumeSUnitIsAkuhnFork
>
> might help. This will fail with DNU on all version except my fork.
>
> --AA
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project