Seaside extensions and lowercase package names in Pharo
Now that Pharo uses real packages beside categories I see some lowercase "ghost" packages in Monticello Browser list after loading Seaside. To reproduce just load Seaside using config browser and check in Monticello browser. I guess this is coming from methods in lowercase extension categories like "*seaside-pharo-core" which do not really match "Seaside-Pharo-Core" package. Any comments? Thx T.
On 31 Jan 2014, at 11:57, Torsten Bergmann <astares@gmx.de> wrote:
Now that Pharo uses real packages beside categories I see some lowercase "ghost" packages in Monticello Browser list after loading Seaside.
To reproduce just load Seaside using config browser and check in Monticello browser.
I guess this is coming from methods in lowercase extension categories like "*seaside-pharo-core" which do not really match "Seaside-Pharo-Core" package.
would be nice to have a little checker :)
Any comments?
Thx T.
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 3:57 AM, Torsten Bergmann <astares@gmx.de> wrote:
Now that Pharo uses real packages beside categories I see some lowercase "ghost" packages in Monticello Browser list after loading Seaside.
To reproduce just load Seaside using config browser and check in Monticello browser.
I guess this is coming from methods in lowercase extension categories like "*seaside-pharo-core" which do not really match "Seaside-Pharo-Core" package.
Any comments?
Using a star (*) and all-lowercase method category names has been the convention for PackageInfo / Monticello for method extensions since the beginning (that is, for many many years now).
You'll undoubtedly run into this several more times - at least you will when bringing in older Monticello packages or those created outside of Pharo. Not all, but some. -cbc
Thx T.
2014-01-31 Chris Cunningham <cunningham.cb@gmail.com>:
You'll undoubtedly run into this several more times - at least you will when bringing in older Monticello packages or those created outside of Pharo. Not all, but some.
Some, which will be very important probably. Like Seaside, Glorp, etc. Regards!
Chris There are several points: - we will maintain compatibility when filein/out using * - now I was not aware that the class extensions should be lower case. - Pharo should clean the packages because some of the extensions are for packages not existing anymore and other edge cases. Stef
On Fri, Jan 31, 2014 at 3:57 AM, Torsten Bergmann <astares@gmx.de> wrote: Now that Pharo uses real packages beside categories I see some lowercase "ghost" packages in Monticello Browser list after loading Seaside.
To reproduce just load Seaside using config browser and check in Monticello browser.
I guess this is coming from methods in lowercase extension categories like "*seaside-pharo-core" which do not really match "Seaside-Pharo-Core" package.
Any comments?
Using a star (*) and all-lowercase method category names has been the convention for PackageInfo / Monticello for method extensions since the beginning (that is, for many many years now).
You'll undoubtedly run into this several more times - at least you will when bringing in older Monticello packages or those created outside of Pharo. Not all, but some.
-cbc Thx T.
Le 02/02/2014 17:11, Pharo4Stef a écrit :
Chris
There are several points: - we will maintain compatibility when filein/out using * - now I was not aware that the class extensions should be lower case.
They are in the current implementation of RPackage. Normally there is code to ensure case-isensivity.
- Pharo should clean the packages because some of the extensions are for packages not existing anymore and other edge cases.
Yes! Thierry -- Thierry Goubier CEA list Laboratoire des Fondations des Systèmes Temps Réel Embarqués 91191 Gif sur Yvette Cedex France Phone/Fax: +33 (0) 1 69 08 32 92 / 83 95
participants (5)
-
Chris Cunningham -
Esteban A. Maringolo -
Goubier Thierry -
Pharo4Stef -
Torsten Bergmann