[Pharo-project] SqueakSource 3
dhenrich at vmware.com
Wed Apr 20 19:15:09 CEST 2011
On Apr 20, 2011, at 7:18 AM, Tobias Pape wrote:
> Am 2011-04-20 um 15:33 schrieb Germán Arduino:
>> 2011/4/20 Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de>:
>>> oO the Seaside3-dependency should be there.
>>> But it is a basic dependency not dictating any adaptor.
>>> To Dale or whoever is capable of this:
>>> How shall I specify 'I want a working Seaside of version X'
>>> in my metacello Config?
>>> Aparently, doing
>>> package: 'SqueakSource-Core' with: [
>>> spec requires: #( "…" 'Seaside Extras' "…" )];
>>> project: 'Seaside Extras' with: [
>>> className: 'ConfigurationOfSeaside30';
>>> loads: #('Seaside-Email' 'RSS-Core');
>>> file: 'ConfigurationOfSeaside30';
>>> versionString: '3.0.4';
>>> repository: 'http://www.squeaksource.com/MetacelloRepository'];
>>> does not suffice.
>> Yes, a dependency is missing. Why not load the complete Seaside?
> I don't understand.
> As an ‘application developer’ I cannot tell the one who will
> install that what installtion configuration of seaside to use.
> Eg, I cannot say 'use this adaptor' because I do not have
> this dependency.
> Is there a 'default group' for Seaside that brings me 'Seaside-Email',
> but a runnable Seaside installation, too?
To answer your second question first. The 'default' for Seaside is to load everything, so all of the pieces covered in tutorials, etc. will be present.
If you want to customize the Seaside load, then you must pick and choose amongst the things that you need for your particular application and that depends upon what you are trying to do, like which adaptor do you want to use and whether or not you want the development environment loaded or not ...
I'm not sure how to answer the first question ... as the developer of SqueakSource3 you can't know how the application will be deployed, so you can't know which adaptors are needed ...you don't even know whether SqueakSource3 will be deployed on Pharo or GemStone or which persistence model might be used like Magma or file-based or image-based...
It would be nice if we had a "standard deployment model" where decisions like this could be specified, along with other deployment time artifacts/configurations like, the name of the site, png file to use for banner, etc. It seems that some code loading is involved in addition to executing custom doits...
I think that the deployment issue encompasses more than just Seaside...
If we had a standard way of specifying deployment artifacts, it would be much easier to imagine being able to deploy SqueakSource3 or SmalltalkHub into the cloud...
More information about the Pharo-project