Just a question: Is there any plan for a Metacello 2? We have learnt a lot and we have a clear idea on a number of versioning scenarios. What do we want the future of packaging in Pharo to look like?
can you describe your scenario because we want versionner++ to support some keys scenarios and not all of them. Christophe is working on TravisCI so that dale can work with Pharo2.0
The minimum I need to live is creating a new version by saving all the Monticello packages. It should be easy to add new dependencies. This is what I somehow have with Versionner (except for the dependencies). I know this will probably not be enough to manage Pharo or Moose, but this will be more than enough for many of us I guess. A nice feature would be to have not-predefined tags on a version (e.g., #myStableVersion #deployedVersion). Things like groups, common platform, dependencies between baselines... I am not really convinced they help me. Maybe this is too complex for me to really understand them. I know there are some documentation. But I cannot afford to read a .pdf each time I need to define a new baseline or add a dependency. I just want to press a "commit" button, as it is done in most versioning systems. The versioning model should also be simple in such a way I can run some analyzes on it (e.g., did I forget to specify a dependency? Do I have cycles in my dependencies?). Alexandre
On Apr 2, 2013, at 7:15 AM, Damien Cassou <damien.cassou@gmail.com> wrote:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/15762706/how-to-define-a-configurationof-...
-- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st
"Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." Winston Churchill
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.