estebanlm at gmail.com
Wed Nov 27 07:08:39 EST 2013
On Wed, Nov 27, 2013 at 1:04 PM, Torsten Bergmann <astares at gmx.de> wrote:
> Esteban wrote:
> >it should
> >we just integrated metacello2, it is not a change of ours, is Dale's...
> and Dale is very concerned with backward compatibility, >so anything could
> be used.
> Think of a config like ConfigurationOfPomodoro - I can load it in Pharo
> 3.0 and Pharo2.0
> right from the config browser.
> In 3.0 I can make it a subclass of ConfigurationOf because I want to clean
> it up (that was the goal of Dale's new class)
> - but then I can only put it into MetaRepoForPharo30 so it appears in
> the Pharo30 config browser
> - I can NOT put it into MetaRepoForPharo20 for Pharo20 config browser
> again, since it will not load
> since there is no such base class in Pharo20
> Even a dependency to metacello2 for Pharo20 in the config itself will not
> help here - since the class is
> not loadable due to the missing superclass. Kind of chicken and egg
> So how can one use the new "ConfigurationOf" by subclassing and cleaning
> still work on Pharo20...
You need to install M2 into Pharo2. No other solution.
But if you still want the automatic backward compatibility, then you can
still do your configuration like before (is compatible).
Sorry, no magic here.
> >In fact, you can load metacello2 into pharo2... if you want to use a
> ConfigurationOf subclass.
> Yes - but in a "simple load it from the config browser" scenario or with
> the usual simple Gofer script
> this is not valid.
> Maybe only a backport of "ConfigurationOf" for Pharo20 will help here.
> Otherwise I doubt it will
> get used in Pharo30 backward compatible configs.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pharo-dev