Le 04/09/2016 à 20:52, Tudor Girba a écrit :

Hi,

That naming convention is due to the fact that there was a time when Monticello committed the content of packages based on prefix matching.

So, if you had: FileSystem-Core FileSystem-Core-Tests committing FileSyste-Core would also commit FileSystem-Core-Tests as a subcategory.

Actually, we still have the bug that if you would change something in FileSystem-Core, FileSystem-Core-Tests would be marked as dirty.

Exactly! At Synectique we had to rename a lot of packages because this bug was really annoying to know what to commit. We opened an issue: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/18712/Monticello-have-strange-behavior-if-...

Still, it would be much better to have naming of a package reflect a categorization. So, FileSystem-Core-Tests would be much more preferable.

Cheers, Doru

-- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com

"If you can't say why something is relevant, it probably isn't."

-- Cyril Ferlicot http://www.synectique.eu 2 rue Jacques Prévert 01, 59650 Villeneuve d'ascq France

On 04 Sep 2016, at 20:52, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:

Actually, we still have the bug that if you would change something in FileSystem-Core, FileSystem-Core-Tests would be marked as dirty.

I think that this happens because we pretend to have packages, but behind the scenes it is still based on the old smalltalk categories… Uko

No guillermo. This is really annoying. With long package list like Collections* then you do not see well the tests. So we should check the bug like that we are free.

Je suis pas de place que no necesita activar gustamucho la 🎶 que ya el otro lado

Le 4 sept. 2016 10:18, "stepharo" <stepharo@free.fr <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>> a écrit :

Hi guys

Sorry to be that dull and stupid but I do not get why (beside following the seaside convention - and I do not understand it either) why the test package for FileSystem-Core is named FileSystem-Tests-Core

and not just

FileSystem-Core-Tests

like that we could have

FileSystem-Core-Help

FileSystem-Core-Examples

And when we are looking for FileSystem-Core we can see automatically FileSystem-Core-Tests

Now we cannot.

Stef

As far as I understand, Iceberg uses RPackages. And RPackages do not necessarily follow MC conventions. -------- Original Message --------

<offtopic> Wow, I do not know where that email came from O_o. It looks a spammish email. Maybe it came from my phone?

If it happens again, please tell me so I can take action. </offtopic>

Now in-topic: I agree with having conventions and with the tests one particularly. But as you say, we should also think what are the benefits in terms of tooling so people do not feel forced to use it: they feel attracted to use it :).

-------- Original Message --------

...

No guillermo. This is really annoying.

With long package list like Collections* then you do not see well the tests.

So we should check the bug like that we are free.

...

Je suis pas de place que no necesita activar gustamucho la 🎶 que ya el otro lado

Le 4 sept. 2016 10:18, "stepharo" <stepharo@free.fr <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>> a écrit :

Hi guys

Sorry to be that dull and stupid but I do not get why (beside following the seaside convention - and I do not understand it either) why the test package for FileSystem-Core is named FileSystem-Tests-Core

and not just

FileSystem-Core-Tests

like that we could have

FileSystem-Core-Help

FileSystem-Core-Examples

And when we are looking for FileSystem-Core we can see automatically FileSystem-Core-Tests

Now we cannot.

Stef

Nice. I wonder where the MC problem is actually coming (probably a notification handled the old way). Le 5/9/16 à 09:58, Nicolas Passerini a écrit :

Yes Icebergs uses RPackages, I have RPackages and Tags and I do not remember having problems.

On Mon, Sep 5, 2016 at 9:50 AM, Guille Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com <mailto:guillermopolito@gmail.com>> wrote:

As far as I understand, Iceberg uses RPackages. And RPackages do not necessarily follow MC conventions.

-------- Original Message --------

...

<offtopic> Wow, I do not know where that email came from O_o. It looks a spammish email. Maybe it came from my phone?

If it happens again, please tell me so I can take action. </offtopic>

Now in-topic: I agree with having conventions and with the tests one particularly. But as you say, we should also think what are the benefits in terms of tooling so people do not feel forced to use it: they feel attracted to use it :).

-------- Original Message --------

...

No guillermo. This is really annoying.

With long package list like Collections* then you do not see well the tests.

So we should check the bug like that we are free.

...

Je suis pas de place que no necesita activar gustamucho la 🎶 que ya el otro lado

Le 4 sept. 2016 10:18, "stepharo" <stepharo@free.fr <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>> a écrit :

Hi guys

Sorry to be that dull and stupid but I do not get why (beside following the seaside convention - and I do not understand it either) why the test package for FileSystem-Core is named FileSystem-Tests-Core

and not just

FileSystem-Core-Tests

like that we could have

FileSystem-Core-Help

FileSystem-Core-Examples

And when we are looking for FileSystem-Core we can see automatically FileSystem-Core-Tests

Now we cannot.

Stef