Torsten Bergmann wrote:
>> And I thought 'Untrusted' was going to be renamed 'Community Supported'
>> or some such. Did that decision get changed or just slide through the
>> cracks?
>>
>
> No "Community supported" sounds like you get something "supported" and working,
> but some of them are outdated and even do not contain a #stable definition.
>
> This "Untrusted" is just a convenience to easily load from the common
>
http://squeaksource.com/MetacelloRepository/> and check if they are working. Esteban added it.
>
> A ConfigurationOfXXX (either in MetacelloRepository or in your own project repo):
> - if known to work in Pharo 2.0 it should be copied also to ss3.gemstone.com/ss/MetaRepoForPharo20
> - if known to work in Pharo 1.4 it should be copied also to
http://squeaksource.com/MetaRepoForPharo14>
> So the first tab in configuration browser contains the ones that
> have been (currently manually) verified to work in the Pharo version you have in front of you
> and the ones on the second "untrusted" tab may or may not work in Pharo 2.0.
> Maybe we should remove the second tab before release.
>
> Bye
> T.
>
>
>
I had made some suggestions a while ago but I had misunderstood the
situation. I would now propose tabs named "Verified" and "Unverified".
More positive than "Untrusted" while remaining neutral on who supports
it, but hinting that the aim is for configurations to move from one
state to the other. I think keeping the second tab in the release is
useful for several reasons:
* the degree to which an old-configuration is broken will vary between
packages.
* jumpstarts users of varying skill to assist with getting packages verified
* continues to promote packages for which effort had been put in
previously to verify on past Pharo releases - and hints for newcomers
that the package could be loaded on previous version to see it working.
cheers -ben
Locked
