Peter, <wishful thinking> In the long term the the MetaRepo should be replaced by a repository of project specification objects (like this [1]). Each project specification would contain the meta data for a project (like this[2]) instead of a copy of a ConfigurationOf that is almost always out-of-date. ConfigurationOf should really be phased out -- they've been obsolete for 3-4 years now... BaselineOf is preferred. If folks are using something like git/github, with proper branching, then a BaselineOf wouldn't be published on the master branch until the unit tests are passing (travis-ci). </wishful thinking> Dale [1] https://github.com/GsDevKit/GsDevKit_home/tree/gh-pages [2] https://github.com/GsDevKit/GsDevKit_home/blob/gh-pages/Seaside3.ston On 2/12/17 4:03 AM, Peter Uhnak wrote:
Hi,
would it make sense to take configurations from metarepos instead directly from the source?
And more imporantly: would be considered bad practice for users to do it right now?
E.g.
spec project: 'Magritte' with: [ spec className: #ConfigurationOfMagritte3; versionString: #stable; repository: 'http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pharo/MetaRepoForPharo50/main/' ].
v. repository: 'http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Magritte/Magritte3/main/'
pros: * the (e.g. Magritte) developer can freely change platforms * the ConfigurationOf could differ between various MetaRepo versions (combined with git it could reduce their complexity) * users do not have to think about where is the canonical repo (I've seen project that had copies on SS, STHub, GitHub, and a custom location -_-)
cons: * the ConfigurationOf could differ between various MetaRepo versions (if the code is compatible, then two repos have to be updated
Any thoughts?
Peter