[Pharo-project] Do we want this for Pharo 1.2 and futures?
In Pharo 1.0 and 1.1 I used to include certain files in addition to the .image and .changes. These files were: changelog.txt, installScript.st and packages.txt So...what do you think? are they (still) useful ? if true, then we should add it to hudson. If not, we just ignore it. Thanks Mariano
I've always ignored them ;) On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck < marianopeck@gmail.com> wrote:
In Pharo 1.0 and 1.1 I used to include certain files in addition to the .image and .changes. These files were: changelog.txt, installScript.st and packages.txt So...what do you think? are they (still) useful ? if true, then we should add it to hudson. If not, we just ignore it.
Thanks
Mariano
On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 7:24 AM, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com
wrote:
I've always ignored them ;)
Me too. For me, we can remove them. But I am wondering if other people find it useful...maybe newcomers? (this is why I also included pharo-users mailing list) cheers mariano
On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck < marianopeck@gmail.com> wrote:
In Pharo 1.0 and 1.1 I used to include certain files in addition to the .image and .changes. These files were: changelog.txt, installScript.st and packages.txt So...what do you think? are they (still) useful ? if true, then we should add it to hudson. If not, we just ignore it.
Thanks
Mariano
installScript definitely yes. changelog is useful if it is accurate and maintained else better avoid it. Packages I never found a reason for it to be in the zip. not very useful for newbies because they don't now what a package is based only in the name and for a experimented user, they can find the packages directly in the image. So, I think that they won't be missing. Cheers El sáb, 12-03-2011 a las 20:13 +0100, Mariano Martinez Peck escribió:
In Pharo 1.0 and 1.1 I used to include certain files in addition to the .image and .changes. These files were: changelog.txt, installScript.st and packages.txt So...what do you think? are they (still) useful ? if true, then we should add it to hudson. If not, we just ignore it.
Thanks
Mariano
-- Miguel Cobá http://twitter.com/MiguelCobaMtz http://miguel.leugim.com.mx
Discussion finished. Marcus, can we add in the PharoDev images a installScript.st with the code that was executed to generate the image? yes, the ConfigurationOfPharo load.... On Sun, Mar 13, 2011 at 6:52 PM, Miguel Cobá <miguel.coba@gmail.com> wrote:
installScript definitely yes.
changelog is useful if it is accurate and maintained else better avoid it. Packages I never found a reason for it to be in the zip. not very useful for newbies because they don't now what a package is based only in the name and for a experimented user, they can find the packages directly in the image.
So, I think that they won't be missing.
Cheers
El sáb, 12-03-2011 a las 20:13 +0100, Mariano Martinez Peck escribió:
In Pharo 1.0 and 1.1 I used to include certain files in addition to the .image and .changes. These files were: changelog.txt, installScript.st and packages.txt So...what do you think? are they (still) useful ? if true, then we should add it to hudson. If not, we just ignore it.
Thanks
Mariano
-- Miguel Cobá http://twitter.com/MiguelCobaMtz http://miguel.leugim.com.mx
-- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
participants (3)
-
Guillermo Polito -
Mariano Martinez Peck -
Miguel Cobá