[Pharo-project] Metacello as the system evolves... (Fwd from Seaside-General: Which image for deployment?)

Stéphane Ducasse stephane.ducasse at inria.fr
Tue May 31 22:43:29 CEST 2011

It also means that we should find somebody that do not piss on metacello and maintain a version for Seaside.
Because we cannot manage complex system with a package management system and there is a cost in 
that but benefit too. Sad but true.


On May 31, 2011, at 9:55 PM, Sean P. DeNigris wrote:

> The following is a conversation about not being able to load Seaside into
> Pharo 1.2 via Metacello (from the Seaside-general list). Shouldn't symbolic
> versions in Metacello have solved this problem? There should be different
> package versions tagged stable for each system (1.2.x, 1.3...) as necessary,
> no? It seems there's not much difference between:
>  Pharo 1.2 vs. Pharo 1.3
>               and
>  Pharo 1.2 vs. Squeak 4.2
> Doesn't symbolic versions finally allow us to have *one* configuration per
> project that will load into any Squeak/Pharo/etc? As a Metacello user, it
> would be comforting to know that there is only one configuration, or needing
> to find the /right/ one replaces one problem (dependencies) with another.
>>> * loading Seaside via Metacello into Pharo (although I got an error in
>>> Pharo 
>>> 1.2.2-12353) 
>> That is a known problem (see 
>> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/seaside-dev/2011-May/004786.html
>> and http://www.iam.unibe.ch/pipermail/moose-dev/2011-May/008309.html). 
>> Some configurations that the Seaside Metacello Configuration depens on 
>> have been updated to Pharo 1.3 breaking all users of older versions of 
>> Pharo. 
>> I was told that the (Pharo?) Metacello configurations do not support 
>> loading into older images. So people that want to use a stable version 
>> of Pharo (< 1.3) cannot load Seaside with Metacello anymore. There are 
>> various solutions: 
>> - Move to (unstable) Pharo 1.3, use a maybe broken Seaside, and load 
>> the code easily with Metacello (this is what Pharo wants us to do) 
>> - Fix the configurations of Pharo or write our own configurations (no 
>> clue how that could be done) 
>> - Stay with (stable) Pharo and use Gofer scripts (this is what I do, 
>> works pretty reliable and painless) 
>> In either case you should complain in the Pharo list, there is 
>> something broken in the process. Personally, I am fedup with these 
>> forced updates and will stick with Pharo 1.2 until there is a really 
>> compelling reason to move forward.
> --
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Metacello-as-the-system-evolves-Fwd-from-Seaside-General-Which-image-for-deployment-tp3564163p3564163.html
> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the Pharo-project mailing list