On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 3:18 AM, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:

Indeed, we would like to encourage the packaging of GT extensions in the same project as the code they extend. So, in this case, GT-InspectorExtensions-XML would be better suited to be in the��PharoExtras/XMLParser repository under XML-Parser-GT-InspectorExtensions.

Actually, given that most of these extensions are not more complicated than a printOn:, I would even argue that in many cases it would be more suitable to have them in the same package as the class they extend. I know it sounds like bad dependency management, but the GT-Inspector is here to stay (and the API will likely remain compatible in the future), so the risk is minimal and I think in many situations you will this approach more pragmatic.

��

This had crossed my mind.�� The upside is that #gtDisplay its unlikely to clash with another platform maybe that its easier to load a single package, but the Configuration should handle this anyhow.��The downside is that unneccessary methods pollute other platforms.�� In this case being under PharoExtras maybe thats not so much a worry, but was XMLParser pulled from somewhere that we should be synchronising with?

��

So, Ben: could you push the package as you described (only call it please XML-Parser-GT-InspectorExtensions)?

��

Thanks for the go ahead.�� Will do.�� Now considering further that that GT-Inspector is here to stay :) perhaps we should go more generic and call the package XML-Parser-PharoCompatibility ?

��

cheers -ben

��

On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:

On Sun, May 3, 2015 at 4:28 AM, stepharo <stepharo@free.fr> wrote:

Hi ben

we could update the configurationOfXMLReader.
But the right solution is to define a new configuration loading GT-Tools, XMLReader and your extensions.
In pharo 40 we could consider that GT-Tools is loaded.
Now I think that making the dependencies explicit is important.

So what do you think of...

* Updating ConfigurationOfXMLParser to automatically load the extensions for Pharo4.

* Moving the package into the XML-Parser repository so it sits next to other compatibility packages like XML-Parser-GemstoneCompatability -- and possibly renaming it something like XML-Parser-GT-Extensions.

The package I maintain with monty is in PharoExtras so I would prefer not to change its location.

I meant moving �� GT-InspectorExtensions-XML..mcz �� from��Smalltalkhub Moose/GToolkit
to��Smalltalkhub PharoExtras/XMLParser ��renamed �� XML-Parser-GTExtensions..mcz ,
but that might not suit the GT Team.

Actually in off-list correspondence with monty I learnt of XMLPluggableElementFactory, ��which seems to suit my need better than my proposed GT extensions for XMLParser.
cheers -ben��

On Sun, Apr 26, 2015 at 8:30 PM, Ben Coman <btc@openinworld.com> wrote:

I happened to need to use and XML Parser for the first time and found inspecting the structure awkward, so I added some GTInspector extensions to XML-Parser. This is uploaded as XML-Parser-BenComan.304 to��http://smalltalkhub.com/#!/~PharoExtras/XMLParser.�� Could someone who uses XML regularly check if these are reasonable?

Now should these methods be packaged separately somehow, since they are likely not of interest to other Smalltalk flavours? ��

btw I gave them a protocol of "GT-Extensions" - but I also considered "moldable-tools" and "tools-extensions".�� If there a preference?�� This will likely be a common occurrence across the community, so we should try for a consistent convention across the community for such extensions.

btw2, I notice that #gtDisplayOn: implementors are fairly evenly split between [GT-InspectorExtensions-Core] and [GT-SpotterExtensions-Core].�� Are they really separated like this in their use?