Le 3/12/14 10:08, Marcus Denker a ��crit��:
Yes, seemingly we lost again the repos of external packages... this is a bug, something in the integraton process resets the reopsitories.

Yes because else we can have dangling refs (you remember the mess in Squeak3.9).
Now this is why we should have package metadata in the image because we could just reset the repo to their package.

I thought that one of the main ideas of versioning systems was that you keep all the important history things on the server.

Yes, else the image will grow indefinitely (as it does now). a whole 1/3 of our image is meta data from Monticello and Scriptloader.
��(Pharo4 is 30.9M, but after Scriploader clean and removing MC history, it is just 22,7MB)

And this is already with killing this meta data at every release. If we would keep it, our image would be around 60MB-80MB, that is we
would have 4 times more history data than real data. (and the .changes I guess far more than 200MB). All this just does not work.

We need a system that allows sustained growth: meta data of history needs to be outside on a server. ��Everything else will not work.

but this is orthogonal to the original problem. I wrote scriptloader to reset the repo because we had different repositories with
different passwords. So the logic is to clean everything.
Now we can add the repo of Glamour and it will be reset and reassigned everything. But the right approach is SIMPLY that
each package declares its home and scriptloader will be able to reset the repo of each package to their home.
This has nothing to do with MC keeping ancestor metadata.
So could we stop sending bad signal about our system? Because Pharo is great.


Stef