OSProcess and CommandShell available on GitHub for Pharo users
Alistair Grant and I, with the support of Feenk, have made GitHub repositories for OSProcess and CommandShell at: https://github.com/dtlewis290/OSProcess-Tonel https://github.com/dtlewis290/CommandShell-Tonel Alistair did the conversions using Peter Uhn??k's migration tool, and I set up the repositories so that they can now be loading in Pharo as follows: Metacello new repository: 'github://dtlewis290/OSProcess-Tonel/src'; baseline: 'OSProcess'; load. Metacello new repository: 'github://dtlewis290/CommandShell-Tonel/src'; baseline: 'CommandShell'; load. Note, the two respositories are named *-Tonel because I also maintain a GitHub repository for OSProcess on Cuis, and will probably do repositories in Squot format in the future. @Thierry Goubier - If you have an account on GitHub I will add you as a collaborator (but my own development work remains on squeaksource so I prefer contributions there anyway). Enjoy, Dave and Alistair
David T. Lewis wrote
Alistair Grant and I, with the support of Feenk, have made GitHub repositories for OSProcess and CommandShell
Thank you to all involved! David T. Lewis wrote
my own development work remains on squeaksource so I prefer contributions there anyway
It might be good to add that disclaimer and the location of the canonical repo to the GH README. Also, does anyone know whether, after loading from GH, one can make enhancements and then simply save to an MCZ repo? ----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
Sean P. DeNigris wrote
...to the GH README
Also: - you can disable the GH issue tracker if you don't want reports there - you don't need the code subfolder (src) in the URL since you have project metadata ----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
Hi Sean, On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 08:16:17AM -0500, Sean P. DeNigris wrote:
David T. Lewis wrote
Alistair Grant and I, with the support of Feenk, have made GitHub repositories for OSProcess and CommandShell
Thank you to all involved!
David T. Lewis wrote
my own development work remains on squeaksource so I prefer contributions there anyway
It might be good to add that disclaimer and the location of the canonical repo to the GH README. Also, does anyone know whether, after loading from GH, one can make enhancements and then simply save to an MCZ repo?
To be honest, I'm not really sure how this should work. My sense is that it is better for Pharo users to use the Pharo tools, and save changes in git. In the case of OSProcess and CommandShell, I can harvest any changes manually, and for me it is probably easiest to just do it that way. Dave
David T. Lewis wrote
they can now be loading in Pharo...
In Pharo 7.0.4, the following chugged for about an hour cycling back and forth between OSP and Command Shell without completing: baseline: 'OSProcess' with: [ spec repository: 'github://dtlewis290/OSProcess-Tonel'; loads: #(#'Core with Output') ] I wonder if it's related to the old circular dependency problem we had which IIRC was resolved with "Pipeability"... ----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 11:01:13AM -0500, Sean P. DeNigris wrote:
David T. Lewis wrote
they can now be loading in Pharo...
In Pharo 7.0.4, the following chugged for about an hour cycling back and forth between OSP and Command Shell without completing: baseline: 'OSProcess' with: [ spec repository: 'github://dtlewis290/OSProcess-Tonel'; loads: #(#'Core with Output') ]
Hi Sean, Alistair put together the two load scripts, and they worked when I last checked them. These are on the README.md descriptions as: Metacello new repository: 'github://dtlewis290/OSProcess-Tonel/src'; baseline: 'OSProcess'; load. Metacello new repository: 'github://dtlewis290/CommandShell-Tonel/src'; baseline: 'CommandShell'; load. I am not familiar with the baseline approach, so maybe someone else can give a pointer?
I wonder if it's related to the old circular dependency problem we had which IIRC was resolved with "Pipeability"...
Possibly so. I think this may have been something to do with an earlier OSProcess load specification that included part of the CommandShell package. Dave
participants (2)
-
David T. Lewis -
Sean P. DeNigris