[Pharo-project] Your take on that: CollectionsTests-Ordered vs Collections-Ordered-Tests
Hi I noticed that we have CollectionsTests-Ordered kind of package name and I would prefer to get Collections-Ordered-Tests What do you think. I bit of regularity would help. Stef
Or better Collections-Tests stef On Sep 10, 2008, at 9:32 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
Hi
I noticed that we have CollectionsTests-Ordered kind of package name and I would prefer to get Collections-Ordered- Tests What do you think. I bit of regularity would help.
Stef
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:32 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
Hi
I noticed that we have CollectionsTests-Ordered kind of package name and I would prefer to get Collections-Ordered-Tests What do you think. I bit of regularity would help.
Collections-Test-* categories belong to the Collections-Test package on monticello. If you rename it to Collections-Ordered-Tests, you will put everything in the Collections package (because there is no Collections-Ordered monticello package). -- Damien Cassou Peter von der Ahé: «I'm beginning to see why Gilad wished us good luck». (http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/override_snafu)
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:49 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
Or better Collections-Tests
That one would be ok -- Damien Cassou Peter von der Ahé: «I'm beginning to see why Gilad wished us good luck». (http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/override_snafu)
Having a package name without any - will prevent Monticello from being confuse on some point. Stef and I already experienced that... I was never happy in inserting a - in a package name. Alexandre On 11 Sep 2008, at 07:23, Damien Cassou wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:32 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
Hi
I noticed that we have CollectionsTests-Ordered kind of package name and I would prefer to get Collections-Ordered- Tests What do you think. I bit of regularity would help.
Collections-Test-* categories belong to the Collections-Test package on monticello. If you rename it to Collections-Ordered-Tests, you will put everything in the Collections package (because there is no Collections-Ordered monticello package).
-- Damien Cassou Peter von der Ahé: «I'm beginning to see why Gilad wished us good luck». (http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/override_snafu) _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
the convention <category>Tests[<-subcategory>] seems great IMO.e.g. Graphics-Text -> GraphicsTests-Text With this naming pattern it is possible to have 2 monticello packages : <category> and <category>Tests And it is possible to not load Tests packages in a deployed image. Luc 2008/9/11 Alexandre Bergel <alexandre@bergel.eu>
Having a package name without any - will prevent Monticello from being confuse on some point. Stef and I already experienced that...
I was never happy in inserting a - in a package name.
Alexandre
On 11 Sep 2008, at 07:23, Damien Cassou wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:32 PM, Stéphane Ducasse
<stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
Hi
I noticed that we have CollectionsTests-Ordered kind of package name and I would prefer to get Collections-Ordered-Tests What do you think. I bit of regularity would help.
Collections-Test-* categories belong to the Collections-Test package on monticello. If you rename it to Collections-Ordered-Tests, you will put everything in the Collections package (because there is no Collections-Ordered monticello package).
-- Damien Cassou Peter von der Ahé: «I'm beginning to see why Gilad wished us good luck». (http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/override_snafu) _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
On Sep 11, 2008, at 9:35 AM, Luc Fabresse wrote:
the convention <category>Tests[<-subcategory>] seems great IMO. e.g. Graphics-Text -> GraphicsTests-Text
With this naming pattern it is possible to have 2 monticello packages : <category> and <category>Tests And it is possible to not load Tests packages in a deployed image.
Yes it does not work if Graphics is composed of several subpackages With this I cannot have Collections-OrderedCollection and Collections-OrderedCollection-Tests separated from Collections-Set and Collections-Set-Tests For me I want to have packages that I can load independently and the tests should be attached to the package (to be eventually not load with it).
I really hate the fact that we feel everywhere category and string matching. Stef
Luc
2008/9/11 Alexandre Bergel <alexandre@bergel.eu> Having a package name without any - will prevent Monticello from being confuse on some point. Stef and I already experienced that...
I was never happy in inserting a - in a package name.
Alexandre
On 11 Sep 2008, at 07:23, Damien Cassou wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:32 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote: Hi
I noticed that we have CollectionsTests-Ordered kind of package name and I would prefer to get Collections-Ordered- Tests What do you think. I bit of regularity would help.
Collections-Test-* categories belong to the Collections-Test package on monticello. If you rename it to Collections-Ordered-Tests, you will put everything in the Collections package (because there is no Collections-Ordered monticello package).
-- Damien Cassou Peter von der Ahé: «I'm beginning to see why Gilad wished us good luck». (http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/override_snafu) _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________ 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
I understand the problem and I did not explain well but the solution of the Graphics package seems great : Graphics-Text Graphics-Files and GraphicsTests-Text GraphicsTests-Files Other packages like Graphics : CollectionTests-*, KernelTests-*, ... Packages with other naming conventions that do not seem great : File-Tests, Tests-*, Monticello-Tests Sure, a system that does not rely on string maching would be better. #Luc 2008/9/11 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>
On Sep 11, 2008, at 9:35 AM, Luc Fabresse wrote:
the convention <category>Tests[<-subcategory>] seems great IMO.
e.g. Graphics-Text -> GraphicsTests-Text
With this naming pattern it is possible to have 2 monticello packages : <category> and <category>Tests And it is possible to not load Tests packages in a deployed image.
Yes it does not work if Graphics is composed of several subpackages
With this I cannot have
Collections-OrderedCollection and Collections-OrderedCollection-Tests
separated from
Collections-Set and Collections-Set-Tests
For me I want to have packages that I can load independently and the tests should be attached to the package (to be eventually not load with it).
I really hate the fact that we feel everywhere category and string matching.
Stef
Luc
2008/9/11 Alexandre Bergel <alexandre@bergel.eu> Having a package name without any - will prevent Monticello from being confuse on some point. Stef and I already experienced that...
I was never happy in inserting a - in a package name.
Alexandre
On 11 Sep 2008, at 07:23, Damien Cassou wrote:
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 9:32 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote: Hi
I noticed that we have CollectionsTests-Ordered kind of package name and I would prefer to get Collections-Ordered-Tests What do you think. I bit of regularity would help.
Collections-Test-* categories belong to the Collections-Test package on monticello. If you rename it to Collections-Ordered-Tests, you will put everything in the Collections package (because there is no Collections-Ordered monticello package).
-- Damien Cassou Peter von der Ahé: «I'm beginning to see why Gilad wished us good luck». (http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/override_snafu) _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
_______________________________________________ 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
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
participants (4)
-
Alexandre Bergel -
Damien Cassou -
Luc Fabresse -
Stéphane Ducasse