Re: [Pharo-users] Repository of petit parser
The official repository of PetitParser is Moose/PetitParser on smalltalkhub http://forum.world.st/moving-petitparser-to-smalltalkhub-td4671840.html
Am 07.11.2013 um 11:07 schrieb Stephan Eggermont <stephan@stack.nl>:
The official repository of PetitParser is Moose/PetitParser on smalltalkhub
thanks.
http://forum.world.st/moving-petitparser-to-smalltalkhub-td4671840.html
Well, this is not a good place IMHO. A more independent but official repo would be nice. Norbert
Hi, It is in the Moose repository because Moose was essentially the first larger user (besides Helvetia) since its inception (more than 3 years now), and because the development of PetitParser was taken care of by the Moose team. If others want to contribute (and even integrate into Pharo), it would be great and then we should move it. But, moving should come with commitment. This is an important piece in Moose and we need it to stay working and compatible with Moose requirements. Cheers, Doru On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 07.11.2013 um 11:07 schrieb Stephan Eggermont <stephan@stack.nl>:
The official repository of PetitParser is Moose/PetitParser on smalltalkhub
thanks.
http://forum.world.st/moving-petitparser-to-smalltalkhub-td4671840.html
Well, this is not a good place IMHO. A more independent but official repo would be nice.
Norbert
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
Am 07.11.2013 um 11:46 schrieb Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com>:
Hi,
It is in the Moose repository because Moose was essentially the first larger user (besides Helvetia) since its inception (more than 3 years now), and because the development of PetitParser was taken care of by the Moose team.
Being a user of a software is not a good reason to tie it to it. Ask Stef ;) It is nice if the moose team took (and takes) care for it. But you can take care in another repository as well. I think petit parser is an important and standalone package that has nothing to do with moose. Putting this inside another project just weakens the included project.
If others want to contribute (and even integrate into Pharo), it would be great and then we should move it. But, moving should come with commitment. This is an important piece in Moose and we need it to stay working and compatible with Moose requirements.
That is what metacello is for. Refer to the versions you need and you are off the races. As you are one of those who maintains it you are even in the position to _not_ integrate every other change. So if the write restriction to petit parser (being in the moose repo) is the solution we should talk. Norbert
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 07.11.2013 um 11:07 schrieb Stephan Eggermont <stephan@stack.nl>:
The official repository of PetitParser is Moose/PetitParser on smalltalkhub
thanks.
http://forum.world.st/moving-petitparser-to-smalltalkhub-td4671840.html
Well, this is not a good place IMHO. A more independent but official repo would be nice.
Norbert
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
Hi, I think you missed my point. I know I can technically load the code from multiple places :). For Moose, PetitParser is an important component that is being developed by the team. Up to now, we did that, hence it made perfect sense to have it in the Moose team repository and in our responsibility. Moving is no problem, as long as we ensure that others actually do something, and that the development does not go in strange directions (which I agree it is unlikely). As I said, it would be great to see PetitParser in the Pharo image and be used by Opal. Cheers, Doru On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 07.11.2013 um 11:46 schrieb Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com>:
Hi,
It is in the Moose repository because Moose was essentially the first larger user (besides Helvetia) since its inception (more than 3 years now), and because the development of PetitParser was taken care of by the Moose team.
Being a user of a software is not a good reason to tie it to it. Ask Stef ;) It is nice if the moose team took (and takes) care for it. But you can take care in another repository as well. I think petit parser is an important and standalone package that has nothing to do with moose. Putting this inside another project just weakens the included project.
If others want to contribute (and even integrate into Pharo), it would be great and then we should move it. But, moving should come with commitment. This is an important piece in Moose and we need it to stay working and compatible with Moose requirements.
That is what metacello is for. Refer to the versions you need and you are off the races. As you are one of those who maintains it you are even in the position to _not_ integrate every other change. So if the write restriction to petit parser (being in the moose repo) is the solution we should talk.
Norbert
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 07.11.2013 um 11:07 schrieb Stephan Eggermont <stephan@stack.nl>:
The official repository of PetitParser is Moose/PetitParser on smalltalkhub
thanks.
http://forum.world.st/moving-petitparser-to-smalltalkhub-td4671840.html
Well, this is not a good place IMHO. A more independent but official repo would be nice.
Norbert
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
Am 07.11.2013 um 12:12 schrieb Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com>:
Hi,
I think you missed my point. I know I can technically load the code from multiple places :).
I know you know. I couldn't miss the point because for me there is none :)
For Moose, PetitParser is an important component that is being developed by the team. Up to now, we did that, hence it made perfect sense to have it in the Moose team repository and in our responsibility.
Agreed. I have just a different view. I'm using petit parser since 2 1/2 years and to me it never made any sense moving it into moose :)
Moving is no problem, as long as we ensure that others actually do something, and that the development does not go in strange directions (which I agree it is unlikely). As I said, it would be great to see PetitParser in the Pharo image and be used by Opal.
Ok, no need to argue. Nothing is carved in stone. I just like to say that I would prefer petit parser breaking loose from moose. Norbert
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 07.11.2013 um 11:46 schrieb Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com>:
Hi,
It is in the Moose repository because Moose was essentially the first larger user (besides Helvetia) since its inception (more than 3 years now), and because the development of PetitParser was taken care of by the Moose team. Being a user of a software is not a good reason to tie it to it. Ask Stef ;) It is nice if the moose team took (and takes) care for it. But you can take care in another repository as well. I think petit parser is an important and standalone package that has nothing to do with moose. Putting this inside another project just weakens the included project.
If others want to contribute (and even integrate into Pharo), it would be great and then we should move it. But, moving should come with commitment. This is an important piece in Moose and we need it to stay working and compatible with Moose requirements. That is what metacello is for. Refer to the versions you need and you are off the races. As you are one of those who maintains it you are even in the position to _not_ integrate every other change. So if the write restriction to petit parser (being in the moose repo) is the solution we should talk.
Norbert
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 07.11.2013 um 11:07 schrieb Stephan Eggermont <stephan@stack.nl>:
The official repository of PetitParser is Moose/PetitParser on smalltalkhub
thanks.
http://forum.world.st/moving-petitparser-to-smalltalkhub-td4671840.html
Well, this is not a good place IMHO. A more independent but official repo would be nice.
Norbert
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
Btw. how is the ConfigurationOfPetitParser supposed to work? I loaded the one from the moose repo. Looking at it I need to use at least 1.6 because earlier versions have still Lukasâ repositories configured. But if I load 1.6 and try to use Versionner it shows me that I have 1.8-snapshot loaded. Is this a problem of versionner because of the use of snapshotocello it canât find version numbers in the version methods? So even if Iâm willing to use the 1.8-snapshot version I canât because I want to load only the core and not the rest of the universe but the groups are missing in 1.8-snapshot while being there in 1.7-snapshot. I would be glad if someone could shed some light how this should work and why it needs all the added complexity. My advize would be to separate metacello configurations for the different uses of it. I do the same with my own projects because it causes less trouble. A ConfigurationOfPetitParser and a separate ConfigurationOfPetitGui that introduces dependencies to glamour et al. would save some headaches for people that are only interested in PetitParser. Norbert Am 07.11.2013 um 13:13 schrieb Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name>:
Am 07.11.2013 um 12:12 schrieb Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com>:
Hi,
I think you missed my point. I know I can technically load the code from multiple places :).
I know you know. I couldn't miss the point because for me there is none :)
For Moose, PetitParser is an important component that is being developed by the team. Up to now, we did that, hence it made perfect sense to have it in the Moose team repository and in our responsibility.
Agreed. I have just a different view. I'm using petit parser since 2 1/2 years and to me it never made any sense moving it into moose :)
Moving is no problem, as long as we ensure that others actually do something, and that the development does not go in strange directions (which I agree it is unlikely). As I said, it would be great to see PetitParser in the Pharo image and be used by Opal.
Ok, no need to argue. Nothing is carved in stone. I just like to say that I would prefer petit parser breaking loose from moose.
Norbert
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 07.11.2013 um 11:46 schrieb Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com>:
Hi,
It is in the Moose repository because Moose was essentially the first larger user (besides Helvetia) since its inception (more than 3 years now), and because the development of PetitParser was taken care of by the Moose team.
Being a user of a software is not a good reason to tie it to it. Ask Stef ;) It is nice if the moose team took (and takes) care for it. But you can take care in another repository as well. I think petit parser is an important and standalone package that has nothing to do with moose. Putting this inside another project just weakens the included project.
If others want to contribute (and even integrate into Pharo), it would be great and then we should move it. But, moving should come with commitment. This is an important piece in Moose and we need it to stay working and compatible with Moose requirements.
That is what metacello is for. Refer to the versions you need and you are off the races. As you are one of those who maintains it you are even in the position to _not_ integrate every other change. So if the write restriction to petit parser (being in the moose repo) is the solution we should talk.
Norbert
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 07.11.2013 um 11:07 schrieb Stephan Eggermont <stephan@stack.nl>:
The official repository of PetitParser is Moose/PetitParser on smalltalkhub
thanks.
http://forum.world.st/moving-petitparser-to-smalltalkhub-td4671840.html
Well, this is not a good place IMHO. A more independent but official repo would be nice.
Norbert
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
Hi, On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Btw. how is the ConfigurationOfPetitParser supposed to work? I loaded the one from the moose repo. Looking at it I need to use at least 1.6 because earlier versions have still Lukasâ repositories configured. But if I load 1.6 and try to use Versionner it shows me that I have 1.8-snapshot loaded. Is this a problem of versionner because of the use of snapshotocello it canât find version numbers in the version methods? So even if Iâm willing to use the 1.8-snapshot version I canât because I want to load only the core and not the rest of the universe but the groups are missing in 1.8-snapshot while being there in 1.7-snapshot.
I would be glad if someone could shed some light how this should work and why it needs all the added complexity.
There is no light other than what you described above. If you want to generate a manual version, you can do that at any time. The current Moose process is to use Snapshotcello and we are unlikely to move away from it in the near future. Diego has a proposal for extending Snapshotcello to preserve the configuration structure, but until that is finished, we live with what we have. Of course, contributions are more than welcome.
My advize would be to separate metacello configurations for the different uses of it. I do the same with my own projects because it causes less trouble. A ConfigurationOfPetitParser and a separate ConfigurationOfPetitGui that introduces dependencies to glamour et al. would save some headaches for people that are only interested in PetitParser.
Thanks for the advice. That is precisely what I meant about people wanting to commit to do things :). There are many ways to make things flexible, but they all come with associated effort. If someone offers to put the effort into it, it would be great. Cheers, Doru
Norbert
Am 07.11.2013 um 13:13 schrieb Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name>:
Am 07.11.2013 um 12:12 schrieb Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com>:
Hi,
I think you missed my point. I know I can technically load the code from multiple places :).
I know you know. I couldn't miss the point because for me there is none :)
For Moose, PetitParser is an important component that is being developed by the team. Up to now, we did that, hence it made perfect sense to have it in the Moose team repository and in our responsibility.
Agreed. I have just a different view. I'm using petit parser since 2 1/2 years and to me it never made any sense moving it into moose :)
Moving is no problem, as long as we ensure that others actually do something, and that the development does not go in strange directions (which I agree it is unlikely). As I said, it would be great to see PetitParser in the Pharo image and be used by Opal.
Ok, no need to argue. Nothing is carved in stone. I just like to say that I would prefer petit parser breaking loose from moose.
Norbert
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 07.11.2013 um 11:46 schrieb Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com>:
Hi,
It is in the Moose repository because Moose was essentially the first larger user (besides Helvetia) since its inception (more than 3 years now), and because the development of PetitParser was taken care of by the Moose team.
Being a user of a software is not a good reason to tie it to it. Ask Stef ;) It is nice if the moose team took (and takes) care for it. But you can take care in another repository as well. I think petit parser is an important and standalone package that has nothing to do with moose. Putting this inside another project just weakens the included project.
If others want to contribute (and even integrate into Pharo), it would be great and then we should move it. But, moving should come with commitment. This is an important piece in Moose and we need it to stay working and compatible with Moose requirements.
That is what metacello is for. Refer to the versions you need and you are off the races. As you are one of those who maintains it you are even in the position to _not_ integrate every other change. So if the write restriction to petit parser (being in the moose repo) is the solution we should talk.
Norbert
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name>wrote:
Am 07.11.2013 um 11:07 schrieb Stephan Eggermont <stephan@stack.nl>:
The official repository of PetitParser is Moose/PetitParser on smalltalkhub
thanks.
http://forum.world.st/moving-petitparser-to-smalltalkhub-td4671840.html
Well, this is not a good place IMHO. A more independent but official repo would be nice.
Norbert
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
Am 07.11.2013 um 16:25 schrieb Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com>:
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote: Btw. how is the ConfigurationOfPetitParser supposed to work? I loaded the one from the moose repo. Looking at it I need to use at least 1.6 because earlier versions have still Lukasâ repositories configured. But if I load 1.6 and try to use Versionner it shows me that I have 1.8-snapshot loaded. Is this a problem of versionner because of the use of snapshotocello it canât find version numbers in the version methods? So even if Iâm willing to use the 1.8-snapshot version I canât because I want to load only the core and not the rest of the universe but the groups are missing in 1.8-snapshot while being there in 1.7-snapshot.
I would be glad if someone could shed some light how this should work and why it needs all the added complexity.
There is no light other than what you described above. If you want to generate a manual version, you can do that at any time. The current Moose process is to use Snapshotcello and we are unlikely to move away from it in the near future. Diego has a proposal for extending Snapshotcello to preserve the configuration structure, but until that is finished, we live with what we have. Of course, contributions are more than welcome.
My advize would be to separate metacello configurations for the different uses of it. I do the same with my own projects because it causes less trouble. A ConfigurationOfPetitParser and a separate ConfigurationOfPetitGui that introduces dependencies to glamour et al. would save some headaches for people that are only interested in PetitParser.
Thanks for the advice. That is precisely what I meant about people wanting to commit to do things :). There are many ways to make things flexible, but they all come with associated effort. If someone offers to put the effort into it, it would be great.
Sure. If we can agree about separating the gui and parser part in different metacello configs Iâm most likely in. But I like to have an agreement first. And if we are at it we could at leat put the parser part into a separate repository. You might leave the gui part in moose for the time being. This way it would be made very easy to integrate petit parser in pharo or â¦. Norbert
Norbert
Am 07.11.2013 um 13:13 schrieb Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name>:
Am 07.11.2013 um 12:12 schrieb Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com>:
Hi,
I think you missed my point. I know I can technically load the code from multiple places :).
I know you know. I couldn't miss the point because for me there is none :)
For Moose, PetitParser is an important component that is being developed by the team. Up to now, we did that, hence it made perfect sense to have it in the Moose team repository and in our responsibility.
Agreed. I have just a different view. I'm using petit parser since 2 1/2 years and to me it never made any sense moving it into moose :)
Moving is no problem, as long as we ensure that others actually do something, and that the development does not go in strange directions (which I agree it is unlikely). As I said, it would be great to see PetitParser in the Pharo image and be used by Opal.
Ok, no need to argue. Nothing is carved in stone. I just like to say that I would prefer petit parser breaking loose from moose.
Norbert
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 07.11.2013 um 11:46 schrieb Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com>:
Hi,
It is in the Moose repository because Moose was essentially the first larger user (besides Helvetia) since its inception (more than 3 years now), and because the development of PetitParser was taken care of by the Moose team.
Being a user of a software is not a good reason to tie it to it. Ask Stef ;) It is nice if the moose team took (and takes) care for it. But you can take care in another repository as well. I think petit parser is an important and standalone package that has nothing to do with moose. Putting this inside another project just weakens the included project.
If others want to contribute (and even integrate into Pharo), it would be great and then we should move it. But, moving should come with commitment. This is an important piece in Moose and we need it to stay working and compatible with Moose requirements.
That is what metacello is for. Refer to the versions you need and you are off the races. As you are one of those who maintains it you are even in the position to _not_ integrate every other change. So if the write restriction to petit parser (being in the moose repo) is the solution we should talk.
Norbert
Cheers, Doru
On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 11:19 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 07.11.2013 um 11:07 schrieb Stephan Eggermont <stephan@stack.nl>:
The official repository of PetitParser is Moose/PetitParser on smalltalkhub
thanks.
http://forum.world.st/moving-petitparser-to-smalltalkhub-td4671840.html
Well, this is not a good place IMHO. A more independent but official repo would be nice.
Norbert
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
Guys even if one day we may integrate petitparser (so far I do not see why - but do not comment). We need an up to date configuration because we want everything with configuration because we want to bootstrap 4.0. Stef
Agreed. But, the ConfigurationOfPetitParser is up to date. It has groups to distinguish between between core and gui. The only problem that Norbert raised is that when using Snapshotcello, the groups are lost due to flattening of the entire configuration. Doru On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>wrote:
Guys
even if one day we may integrate petitparser (so far I do not see why - but do not comment). We need an up to date configuration because we want everything with configuration because we want to bootstrap 4.0.
Stef
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
Indeed. I see and I did not got the time to fix the issue I saw when applying on private projects.
Agreed. But, the ConfigurationOfPetitParser is up to date. It has groups to distinguish between between core and gui.
The only problem that Norbert raised is that when using Snapshotcello, the groups are lost due to flattening of the entire configuration.
Doru
On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote: Guys
even if one day we may integrate petitparser (so far I do not see why - but do not comment). We need an up to date configuration because we want everything with configuration because we want to bootstrap 4.0.
Stef
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
Am 09.11.2013 um 12:21 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:
Indeed. I see and I did not got the time to fix the issue I saw when applying on private projects.
Agreed. But, the ConfigurationOfPetitParser is up to date. It has groups to distinguish between between core and gui.
The only problem that Norbert raised is that when using Snapshotcello, the groups are lost due to flattening of the entire configuration.
Which makes it unusable for me. Or at least I didn't figure out a way how to circumvent this behaviour.
Norbert
Doru
On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote: Guys
even if one day we may integrate petitparser (so far I do not see why - but do not comment). We need an up to date configuration because we want everything with configuration because we want to bootstrap 4.0.
Stef
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
There is a very easy way. Create a configuration version that explicitly specify the package versions without Snapshotcello. Doru On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 09.11.2013 um 12:21 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
:
Indeed. I see and I did not got the time to fix the issue I saw when applying on private projects.
Agreed. But, the ConfigurationOfPetitParser is up to date. It has groups to distinguish between between core and gui.
The only problem that Norbert raised is that when using Snapshotcello, the groups are lost due to flattening of the entire configuration.
Which makes it unusable for me. Or at least I didn't figure out a way how to circumvent this behaviour.
Norbert
Doru
On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Stéphane Ducasse < stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
Guys
even if one day we may integrate petitparser (so far I do not see why - but do not comment). We need an up to date configuration because we want everything with configuration because we want to bootstrap 4.0.
Stef
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
Am 09.11.2013 um 22:04 schrieb Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com>:
There is a very easy way. Create a configuration version that explicitly specify the package versions without Snapshotcello.
There is still version 1.6 that is made that way. I tried using it with Versionner but that doesn't work. I load 1.6 but the next time I create a new version it assumes I have 1.8-snapshot loaded which I cannot load afterwards because I refer only to the core but the group isn't there. So even if I would add a manual version I assume it will break the next time you guys add one. Btw. is the metacello mangeling part in Snapshotocello und Versionner not something where forces should be joined? Versionner generates versions that have the individual package versions written in the method. And I have no glue why snapshotocello is not writing the versions in the version method. My gut feeling is that metacello is complex enough and putting another layer of dynamism in the mix that tries to be clever is probably not the best choice. Norbert
Doru
On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 09.11.2013 um 12:21 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:
Indeed. I see and I did not got the time to fix the issue I saw when applying on private projects.
Agreed. But, the ConfigurationOfPetitParser is up to date. It has groups to distinguish between between core and gui.
The only problem that Norbert raised is that when using Snapshotcello, the groups are lost due to flattening of the entire configuration.
Which makes it unusable for me. Or at least I didn't figure out a way how to circumvent this behaviour.
Norbert
Doru
On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote: Guys
even if one day we may integrate petitparser (so far I do not see why - but do not comment). We need an up to date configuration because we want everything with configuration because we want to bootstrap 4.0.
Stef
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
Hi, I documented Snapshotcello here: http://www.tudorgirba.com/blog/snapshotcello-take-a-snapshot-when-you-re-rea... http://www.tudorgirba.com/blog/snappier-snapshotcello In short, the reason for Snapshotcello is to deal with deeply nested configurations, like we have in Moose, in a reliable way. So, the goal is to be able to develop on the latest package version at all time, and when ready to take a reloadable snapshot. For now, this implies flattening everything. The actual version strings are not written in the version method because of the 256 literals limitation. So, we are writing all version strings in an array, and creating a Metacello version out of them. In any case, if you want to create a proper Metacello version, all you have to do is: - load the snapshot version - then create a version based on the corresponding baseline (usually the last baseline) - publish the configuration Doru On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 09.11.2013 um 22:04 schrieb Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com>:
There is a very easy way. Create a configuration version that explicitly specify the package versions without Snapshotcello.
There is still version 1.6 that is made that way. I tried using it with Versionner but that doesn't work. I load 1.6 but the next time I create a new version it assumes I have 1.8-snapshot loaded which I cannot load afterwards because I refer only to the core but the group isn't there. So even if I would add a manual version I assume it will break the next time you guys add one. Btw. is the metacello mangeling part in Snapshotocello und Versionner not something where forces should be joined? Versionner generates versions that have the individual package versions written in the method. And I have no glue why snapshotocello is not writing the versions in the version method. My gut feeling is that metacello is complex enough and putting another layer of dynamism in the mix that tries to be clever is probably not the best choice.
Norbert
Doru
On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 3:38 PM, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
Am 09.11.2013 um 12:21 schrieb Stéphane Ducasse < stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:
Indeed. I see and I did not got the time to fix the issue I saw when applying on private projects.
Agreed. But, the ConfigurationOfPetitParser is up to date. It has groups to distinguish between between core and gui.
The only problem that Norbert raised is that when using Snapshotcello, the groups are lost due to flattening of the entire configuration.
Which makes it unusable for me. Or at least I didn't figure out a way how to circumvent this behaviour.
Norbert
Doru
On Sat, Nov 9, 2013 at 2:12 AM, Stéphane Ducasse < stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
Guys
even if one day we may integrate petitparser (so far I do not see why - but do not comment). We need an up to date configuration because we want everything with configuration because we want to bootstrap 4.0.
Stef
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
participants (4)
-
Norbert Hartl -
Stephan Eggermont -
Stéphane Ducasse -
Tudor Girba