[Pharo-project] .changes are now 37MBâ¦.
... what do we do? http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4843 (but that will not help that much. And someone would need to look at the tracker entry and make it ready for integration). or just do a condense? The history is in Monticello. http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=5379 Marcus -- Marcus Denker -- http://marcusdenker.de
May be it would be good to have a look at eliot changes but we need time for that.
... what do we do?
http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4843 (but that will not help that much. And someone would need to look at the tracker entry and make it ready for integration).
or just do a condense? The history is in Monticello.
http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=5379
Marcus
-- Marcus Denker -- http://marcusdenker.de
On 06.03.2012 09:44, Marcus Denker wrote:
... what do we do?
http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4843 (but that will not help that much. And someone would need to look at the tracker entry and make it ready for integration).
or just do a condense? The history is in Monticello.
Do people actually really rely on the .changes or just say they do? I'd be fine with just a condense. Cheers Philippe
This may be a stupid question⦠(As far as I understand, condensing the changes is not the same) Why don't you increment the version number of the sources file to 1.1 and use a fresh changes file? Max On 06.03.2012, at 18:42, Philippe Marschall wrote:
On 06.03.2012 09:44, Marcus Denker wrote:
... what do we do?
http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=4843 (but that will not help that much. And someone would need to look at the tracker entry and make it ready for integration).
or just do a condense? The history is in Monticello.
Do people actually really rely on the .changes or just say they do? I'd be fine with just a condense.
Cheers Philippe
participants (4)
-
Marcus Denker -
Max Leske -
Philippe Marschall -
Stéphane Ducasse