Selecting a package in the Monticello browser
Hi! Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient... Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug? Doru On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com>wrote:
Hi!
Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient...
Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
The idea was that repositories were shared among packages. Otherwise, you have to type your password a billion times Ben On 03 Nov 2013, at 21:49, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com> wrote: Hi!
Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient...
Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
I do not understand what the password has to do with showing only the relevant repositories for a selected package. Could you explain? Doru On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Benjamin <benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The idea was that repositories were shared among packages.
Otherwise, you have to type your password a billion times
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 21:49, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com> wrote: Hi!
Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient...
Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com "What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
The thing is you use to have one instance of the same MCRepository per package. By example, the Pharo repository was in fact #{packageNumber} instances. So the change you make on one (by example, string your password) was not reflected to the others. And it seems that during the fix of this, this issue was introduced. (I think the easy solution taken was to have the same repositories for everything). Itâs indeed kind of a paint o deal with, but a smaller one that it use to be :) Definitely itâs a bug, not a feature :) We should wait tip Guillermoâs answer since he was the one fixing this painful behaviour (2 sprints ago) Ben On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:44, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
I do not understand what the password has to do with showing only the relevant repositories for a selected package. Could you explain?
Doru
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Benjamin <benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The idea was that repositories were shared among packages.
Otherwise, you have to type your password a billion times
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 21:49, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com> wrote: Hi!
Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient...
Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
Strange. Pharo 2.0 does not seem to have the replication of repository instances problem. Any idea what introduced this? Doru On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Benjamin < Benjamin.VanRyseghem.Pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The thing is you use to have one instance of the same MCRepository per package. By example, the Pharo repository was in fact #{packageNumber} instances.
So the change you make on one (by example, string your password) was not reflected to the others. And it seems that during the fix of this, this issue was introduced.
(I think the easy solution taken was to have the same repositories for everything). Itâs indeed kind of a paint o deal with, but a smaller one that it use to be :)
Definitely itâs a bug, not a feature :) We should wait tip Guillermoâs answer since he was the one fixing this painful behaviour (2 sprints ago)
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:44, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
I do not understand what the password has to do with showing only the relevant repositories for a selected package. Could you explain?
Doru
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Benjamin < benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The idea was that repositories were shared among packages.
Otherwise, you have to type your password a billion times
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 21:49, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com> wrote: Hi!
Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient...
Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
Nope :( Ben On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:52, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Strange. Pharo 2.0 does not seem to have the replication of repository instances problem. Any idea what introduced this?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Benjamin <Benjamin.VanRyseghem.Pharo@gmail.com> wrote: The thing is you use to have one instance of the same MCRepository per package. By example, the Pharo repository was in fact #{packageNumber} instances.
So the change you make on one (by example, string your password) was not reflected to the others. And it seems that during the fix of this, this issue was introduced.
(I think the easy solution taken was to have the same repositories for everything). Itâs indeed kind of a paint o deal with, but a smaller one that it use to be :)
Definitely itâs a bug, not a feature :) We should wait tip Guillermoâs answer since he was the one fixing this painful behaviour (2 sprints ago)
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:44, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
I do not understand what the password has to do with showing only the relevant repositories for a selected package. Could you explain?
Doru
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Benjamin <benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The idea was that repositories were shared among packages.
Otherwise, you have to type your password a billion times
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 21:49, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com> wrote: Hi!
Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient...
Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/12064/Selecting-a-package-in-the-Monticell... Alexandre On Nov 3, 2013, at 6:55 PM, Benjamin <benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
Nope :(
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:52, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Strange. Pharo 2.0 does not seem to have the replication of repository instances problem. Any idea what introduced this?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Benjamin <Benjamin.VanRyseghem.Pharo@gmail.com> wrote: The thing is you use to have one instance of the same MCRepository per package. By example, the Pharo repository was in fact #{packageNumber} instances.
So the change you make on one (by example, string your password) was not reflected to the others. And it seems that during the fix of this, this issue was introduced.
(I think the easy solution taken was to have the same repositories for everything). Itâs indeed kind of a paint o deal with, but a smaller one that it use to be :)
Definitely itâs a bug, not a feature :) We should wait tip Guillermoâs answer since he was the one fixing this painful behaviour (2 sprints ago)
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:44, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
I do not understand what the password has to do with showing only the relevant repositories for a selected package. Could you explain?
Doru
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Benjamin <benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The idea was that repositories were shared among packages.
Otherwise, you have to type your password a billion times
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 21:49, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com> wrote: Hi!
Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient...
Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Thanks. Doru On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com>wrote:
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/12064/Selecting-a-package-in-the-Monticell...
Alexandre
On Nov 3, 2013, at 6:55 PM, Benjamin <benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
Nope :(
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:52, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Strange. Pharo 2.0 does not seem to have the replication of repository instances problem. Any idea what introduced this?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Benjamin < Benjamin.VanRyseghem.Pharo@gmail.com> wrote: The thing is you use to have one instance of the same MCRepository per package. By example, the Pharo repository was in fact #{packageNumber} instances.
So the change you make on one (by example, string your password) was not reflected to the others. And it seems that during the fix of this, this issue was introduced.
(I think the easy solution taken was to have the same repositories for everything). Itâs indeed kind of a paint o deal with, but a smaller one that it use to be :)
Definitely itâs a bug, not a feature :) We should wait tip Guillermoâs answer since he was the one fixing this painful behaviour (2 sprints ago)
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:44, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
I do not understand what the password has to do with showing only the relevant repositories for a selected package. Could you explain?
Doru
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Benjamin < benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The idea was that repositories were shared among packages.
Otherwise, you have to type your password a billion times
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 21:49, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel < alexandre.bergel@me.com> wrote: Hi!
Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient...
Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
See also https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?10263 Phil On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 11:21 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Thanks.
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 11:02 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com
wrote:
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/12064/Selecting-a-package-in-the-Monticell...
Alexandre
On Nov 3, 2013, at 6:55 PM, Benjamin < benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
Nope :(
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:52, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Strange. Pharo 2.0 does not seem to have the replication of repository instances problem. Any idea what introduced this?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 10:49 PM, Benjamin < Benjamin.VanRyseghem.Pharo@gmail.com> wrote: The thing is you use to have one instance of the same MCRepository per package. By example, the Pharo repository was in fact #{packageNumber} instances.
So the change you make on one (by example, string your password) was not reflected to the others. And it seems that during the fix of this, this issue was introduced.
(I think the easy solution taken was to have the same repositories for everything). Itâs indeed kind of a paint o deal with, but a smaller one that it use to be :)
Definitely itâs a bug, not a feature :) We should wait tip Guillermoâs answer since he was the one fixing this painful behaviour (2 sprints ago)
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:44, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
I do not understand what the password has to do with showing only the relevant repositories for a selected package. Could you explain?
Doru
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Benjamin < benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The idea was that repositories were shared among packages.
Otherwise, you have to type your password a billion times
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 21:49, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel < alexandre.bergel@me.com> wrote: Hi!
Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient...
Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
Ben this is good to share repositories :) I got burned so many times while integrating changes back in Squeak 3.9 that this is the first things I did for the scriptLoader. Now I do not see why when we select a package we should see the ones that are not associated with the package. Stef On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:49 PM, Benjamin <Benjamin.VanRyseghem.Pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The thing is you use to have one instance of the same MCRepository per package. By example, the Pharo repository was in fact #{packageNumber} instances.
So the change you make on one (by example, string your password) was not reflected to the others. And it seems that during the fix of this, this issue was introduced.
(I think the easy solution taken was to have the same repositories for everything). Itâs indeed kind of a paint o deal with, but a smaller one that it use to be :)
Definitely itâs a bug, not a feature :) We should wait tip Guillermoâs answer since he was the one fixing this painful behaviour (2 sprints ago)
We can try to do something during the sprint thursday.
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:44, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
I do not understand what the password has to do with showing only the relevant repositories for a selected package. Could you explain?
Doru
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Benjamin <benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The idea was that repositories were shared among packages.
Otherwise, you have to type your password a billion times
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 21:49, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com> wrote: Hi!
Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient...
Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
So we were discussing this here in the sprint. People say this is a feature. To be this is a bug. The change is in repositoryGroup ^ workingCopy ifNil: [MCRepositoryGroup default] ifNotNil: [workingCopy repositoryGroup] which right now it is as repositoryGroup ^ MCRepositoryGroup default So we will probably put a setting for the moment because we cannot agree. Cheers, On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>wrote:
Ben
this is good to share repositories :) I got burned so many times while integrating changes back in Squeak 3.9 that this is the first things I did for the scriptLoader. Now I do not see why when we select a package we should see the ones that are not associated with the package.
Stef
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:49 PM, Benjamin < Benjamin.VanRyseghem.Pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The thing is you use to have one instance of the same MCRepository per package. By example, the Pharo repository was in fact #{packageNumber} instances.
So the change you make on one (by example, string your password) was not reflected to the others. And it seems that during the fix of this, this issue was introduced.
(I think the easy solution taken was to have the same repositories for everything). Itâs indeed kind of a paint o deal with, but a smaller one that it use to be :)
Definitely itâs a bug, not a feature :) We should wait tip Guillermoâs answer since he was the one fixing this painful behaviour (2 sprints ago)
We can try to do something during the sprint thursday.
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:44, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
I do not understand what the password has to do with showing only the relevant repositories for a selected package. Could you explain?
Doru
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Benjamin < benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The idea was that repositories were shared among packages.
Otherwise, you have to type your password a billion times
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 21:49, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com> wrote: Hi!
Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient...
Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
-- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
I do not like it either... but if there are more than one repository group (like before 1 per package) we have to make sure the repositories are unique per URL, otherwise you end up with different repositories which look the same but for instance do not have the same credentials, which was the problem we had back then. I remember that whenever we added a SLICE the inbox repository got duplicated causing qutie a bit of confusion, since you had to re-enter your password twice or more... On 2013-11-07, at 17:09, Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck@gmail.com> wrote:
So we were discussing this here in the sprint. People say this is a feature. To be this is a bug.
The change is in
repositoryGroup ^ workingCopy ifNil: [MCRepositoryGroup default] ifNotNil: [workingCopy repositoryGroup]
which right now it is as
repositoryGroup ^ MCRepositoryGroup default
So we will probably put a setting for the moment because we cannot agree.
Cheers,
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote: Ben
this is good to share repositories :) I got burned so many times while integrating changes back in Squeak 3.9 that this is the first things I did for the scriptLoader. Now I do not see why when we select a package we should see the ones that are not associated with the package.
Stef
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:49 PM, Benjamin <Benjamin.VanRyseghem.Pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The thing is you use to have one instance of the same MCRepository per package. By example, the Pharo repository was in fact #{packageNumber} instances.
So the change you make on one (by example, string your password) was not reflected to the others. And it seems that during the fix of this, this issue was introduced.
(I think the easy solution taken was to have the same repositories for everything). Itâs indeed kind of a paint o deal with, but a smaller one that it use to be :)
Definitely itâs a bug, not a feature :) We should wait tip Guillermoâs answer since he was the one fixing this painful behaviour (2 sprints ago)
We can try to do something during the sprint thursday.
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:44, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
I do not understand what the password has to do with showing only the relevant repositories for a selected package. Could you explain?
Doru
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Benjamin <benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The idea was that repositories were shared among packages.
Otherwise, you have to type your password a billion times
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 21:49, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com> wrote: Hi!
Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient...
Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
-- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni@gmail.com>wrote:
I do not like it either... but if there are more than one repository group (like before 1 per package) we have to make sure the repositories are unique per URL, otherwise you end up with different repositories which look the same but for instance do not have the same credentials, which was the problem we had back then.
Cami, Say I have 2 different packages. Both have the PharoInbox and Pharo20 as repos. If I edit and add a password to the ones of the package1 and then I go to package2, the password is kept. And this is the case even for 2.0. So maybe you are saying a different scenario?
I remember that whenever we added a SLICE the inbox repository got duplicated causing qutie a bit of confusion, since you had to re-enter your password twice or more...
On 2013-11-07, at 17:09, Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck@gmail.com> wrote:
So we were discussing this here in the sprint. People say this is a feature. To be this is a bug.
The change is in
repositoryGroup ^ workingCopy ifNil: [MCRepositoryGroup default] ifNotNil: [workingCopy repositoryGroup]
which right now it is as
repositoryGroup ^ MCRepositoryGroup default
So we will probably put a setting for the moment because we cannot agree.
Cheers,
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Stéphane Ducasse < stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote: Ben
this is good to share repositories :) I got burned so many times while integrating changes back in Squeak 3.9 that this is the first things I did for the scriptLoader. Now I do not see why when we select a package we should see the ones that are not associated with the package.
Stef
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:49 PM, Benjamin < Benjamin.VanRyseghem.Pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The thing is you use to have one instance of the same MCRepository per package. By example, the Pharo repository was in fact #{packageNumber} instances.
So the change you make on one (by example, string your password) was not reflected to the others. And it seems that during the fix of this, this issue was introduced.
(I think the easy solution taken was to have the same repositories for everything). Itâs indeed kind of a paint o deal with, but a smaller one that it use to be :)
Definitely itâs a bug, not a feature :) We should wait tip Guillermoâs answer since he was the one fixing this painful behaviour (2 sprints ago)
We can try to do something during the sprint thursday.
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:44, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
I do not understand what the password has to do with showing only the relevant repositories for a selected package. Could you explain?
Doru
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Benjamin < benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The idea was that repositories were shared among packages.
Otherwise, you have to type your password a billion times
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 21:49, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel < alexandre.bergel@me.com> wrote: Hi!
Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient...
Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
-- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
-- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
OK. We commited this: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/12064/Selecting-a-package-in-the-Monticell... Now you are able to change the behavior, either from the settings browser or either from right clicking on the right panel (repositories) in the Monticello Browser (there is a checkbox). Cheers, On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck@gmail.com
wrote:
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni@gmail.com>wrote:
I do not like it either... but if there are more than one repository group (like before 1 per package) we have to make sure the repositories are unique per URL, otherwise you end up with different repositories which look the same but for instance do not have the same credentials, which was the problem we had back then.
Cami,
Say I have 2 different packages. Both have the PharoInbox and Pharo20 as repos. If I edit and add a password to the ones of the package1 and then I go to package2, the password is kept. And this is the case even for 2.0. So maybe you are saying a different scenario?
I remember that whenever we added a SLICE the inbox repository got duplicated causing qutie a bit of confusion, since you had to re-enter your password twice or more...
On 2013-11-07, at 17:09, Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck@gmail.com> wrote:
So we were discussing this here in the sprint. People say this is a feature. To be this is a bug.
The change is in
repositoryGroup ^ workingCopy ifNil: [MCRepositoryGroup default] ifNotNil: [workingCopy repositoryGroup]
which right now it is as
repositoryGroup ^ MCRepositoryGroup default
So we will probably put a setting for the moment because we cannot agree.
Cheers,
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Stéphane Ducasse < stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote: Ben
this is good to share repositories :) I got burned so many times while integrating changes back in Squeak 3.9 that this is the first things I did for the scriptLoader. Now I do not see why when we select a package we should see the ones that are not associated with the package.
Stef
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:49 PM, Benjamin < Benjamin.VanRyseghem.Pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The thing is you use to have one instance of the same MCRepository per package. By example, the Pharo repository was in fact #{packageNumber} instances.
So the change you make on one (by example, string your password) was not reflected to the others. And it seems that during the fix of this, this issue was introduced.
(I think the easy solution taken was to have the same repositories for everything). Itâs indeed kind of a paint o deal with, but a smaller one that it use to be :)
Definitely itâs a bug, not a feature :) We should wait tip Guillermoâs answer since he was the one fixing this painful behaviour (2 sprints ago)
We can try to do something during the sprint thursday.
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:44, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
I do not understand what the password has to do with showing only the relevant repositories for a selected package. Could you explain?
Doru
On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Benjamin < benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo@gmail.com> wrote:
The idea was that repositories were shared among packages.
Otherwise, you have to type your password a billion times
Ben
On 03 Nov 2013, at 21:49, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug?
Doru
On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel < alexandre.bergel@me.com> wrote: Hi!
Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather convenient...
Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
-- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
-- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
-- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
participants (8)
-
Alexandre Bergel -
Benjamin -
Benjamin
-
Camillo Bruni -
Mariano Martinez Peck -
phil＠highoctane.be -
Stéphane Ducasse -
Tudor Girba