ConfigurationOfPetitParser has broken #'common' section

> By "broken" I mean "it might work fine in Pharo but it doesn't in Squeak".
>
> That's because PetitParser now uses Glamour, which pulls in a whole
> host of things that probably don't work in Squeak. (I don't know, I
> haven't tried, but these are all UI things, and the UI is where Pharo
> and Squeak are least compatible.)
>
> I'm being a bit rude in that I don't yet have a fix for the issue.
> Ideally, a ConfigurationOf would have Pharo specific stuff and Squeak
> specific stuff in separate sections, with only the shared things
> (right now, not Glamour, nor its dependents) in the #'common' section.
>
> However, if someone doesn't beat me to it, I'll submit a fix soon,
> once Squeak 4.4 is out the door.
>
> frank
>

> just load the minimal group and you're fine. That's what we do in 2.0 as well...
>
>
> On 2012-12-04, at 18:32, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> By "broken" I mean "it might work fine in Pharo but it doesn't in Squeak".
>>
>> That's because PetitParser now uses Glamour, which pulls in a whole
>> host of things that probably don't work in Squeak. (I don't know, I
>> haven't tried, but these are all UI things, and the UI is where Pharo
>> and Squeak are least compatible.)
>>
>> I'm being a bit rude in that I don't yet have a fix for the issue.
>> Ideally, a ConfigurationOf would have Pharo specific stuff and Squeak
>> specific stuff in separate sections, with only the shared things
>> (right now, not Glamour, nor its dependents) in the #'common' section.
>>
>> However, if someone doesn't beat me to it, I'll submit a fix soon,
>> once Squeak 4.4 is out the door.
>>
>> frank
>>
>
>

> Oh, I see a minimal Petit... But isn't that going to be too small?
> Alternatively why not a ConfigurationOfGrosParser ?
>
> Nicolas
>
> 2012/12/4 Camillo Bruni <[hidden email]>:
>> just load the minimal group and you're fine. That's what we do in 2.0 as well...
>>
>>
>> On 2012-12-04, at 18:32, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> By "broken" I mean "it might work fine in Pharo but it doesn't in Squeak".
>>>
>>> That's because PetitParser now uses Glamour, which pulls in a whole
>>> host of things that probably don't work in Squeak. (I don't know, I
>>> haven't tried, but these are all UI things, and the UI is where Pharo
>>> and Squeak are least compatible.)
>>>
>>> I'm being a bit rude in that I don't yet have a fix for the issue.
>>> Ideally, a ConfigurationOf would have Pharo specific stuff and Squeak
>>> specific stuff in separate sections, with only the shared things
>>> (right now, not Glamour, nor its dependents) in the #'common' section.
>>>
>>> However, if someone doesn't beat me to it, I'll submit a fix soon,
>>> once Squeak 4.4 is out the door.
>>>
>>> frank
>>>
>>
>>
>

> hard to guess if I don't know the project :P
> for me it worked you have all the parsing capabilities minus the debug UIs
>
> On 2012-12-04, at 18:51, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Oh, I see a minimal Petit... But isn't that going to be too small?
>> Alternatively why not a ConfigurationOfGrosParser ?
>>
>> Nicolas
>>
>> 2012/12/4 Camillo Bruni <[hidden email]>:
>>> just load the minimal group and you're fine. That's what we do in 2.0 as well...
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2012-12-04, at 18:32, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> By "broken" I mean "it might work fine in Pharo but it doesn't in Squeak".
>>>>
>>>> That's because PetitParser now uses Glamour, which pulls in a whole
>>>> host of things that probably don't work in Squeak. (I don't know, I
>>>> haven't tried, but these are all UI things, and the UI is where Pharo
>>>> and Squeak are least compatible.)
>>>>
>>>> I'm being a bit rude in that I don't yet have a fix for the issue.
>>>> Ideally, a ConfigurationOf would have Pharo specific stuff and Squeak
>>>> specific stuff in separate sections, with only the shared things
>>>> (right now, not Glamour, nor its dependents) in the #'common' section.
>>>>
>>>> However, if someone doesn't beat me to it, I'll submit a fix soon,
>>>> once Squeak 4.4 is out the door.
>>>>
>>>> frank
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>

> frank
>
> On 4 December 2012 22:19, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Thanks Camillo, that's done the trick.
>>
>> I've found _another_ problems with the configuration, but that I can
>> fix. (The configuration only works if you have a network connection.)
>> I'll hopefully post a fix in the very near future.
>>
>> frank
>>
>> On 4 December 2012 21:54, Camillo Bruni <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> hard to guess if I don't know the project :P
>>> for me it worked you have all the parsing capabilities minus the debug UIs
>>>
>>> On 2012-12-04, at 18:51, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Oh, I see a minimal Petit... But isn't that going to be too small?
>>>> Alternatively why not a ConfigurationOfGrosParser ?
>>>>
>>>> Nicolas
>>>>
>>>> 2012/12/4 Camillo Bruni <[hidden email]>:
>>>>> just load the minimal group and you're fine. That's what we do in 2.0 as well...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2012-12-04, at 18:32, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> By "broken" I mean "it might work fine in Pharo but it doesn't in Squeak".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's because PetitParser now uses Glamour, which pulls in a whole
>>>>>> host of things that probably don't work in Squeak. (I don't know, I
>>>>>> haven't tried, but these are all UI things, and the UI is where Pharo
>>>>>> and Squeak are least compatible.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm being a bit rude in that I don't yet have a fix for the issue.
>>>>>> Ideally, a ConfigurationOf would have Pharo specific stuff and Squeak
>>>>>> specific stuff in separate sections, with only the shared things
>>>>>> (right now, not Glamour, nor its dependents) in the #'common' section.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, if someone doesn't beat me to it, I'll submit a fix soon,
>>>>>> once Squeak 4.4 is out the door.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> frank
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>

> On 5 December 2012 22:33, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> The attached bootstraps Metacello and Gofer if they're not already
>> present. (They're not, in Squeak.)
>>
>> Offline loading - loading without a network connection - doesn't quite
>> work yet; I couldn't chase down the nil. But with a network connection
>> it works just fine.
>
> Even though I haven't nailed the offline loading, given that this
> configuration fixes the described issue and works when you _do_ have
> an internet connection, who should I talk to about getting this merged
> in?

> frank
>
>> frank
>>
>> On 4 December 2012 22:19, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> Thanks Camillo, that's done the trick.
>>>
>>> I've found _another_ problems with the configuration, but that I can
>>> fix. (The configuration only works if you have a network connection.)
>>> I'll hopefully post a fix in the very near future.
>>>
>>> frank
>>>
>>> On 4 December 2012 21:54, Camillo Bruni <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> hard to guess if I don't know the project :P
>>>> for me it worked you have all the parsing capabilities minus the debug UIs
>>>>
>>>> On 2012-12-04, at 18:51, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Oh, I see a minimal Petit... But isn't that going to be too small?
>>>>> Alternatively why not a ConfigurationOfGrosParser ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Nicolas
>>>>>
>>>>> 2012/12/4 Camillo Bruni <[hidden email]>:
>>>>>> just load the minimal group and you're fine. That's what we do in 2.0 as well...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2012-12-04, at 18:32, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> By "broken" I mean "it might work fine in Pharo but it doesn't in Squeak".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's because PetitParser now uses Glamour, which pulls in a whole
>>>>>>> host of things that probably don't work in Squeak. (I don't know, I
>>>>>>> haven't tried, but these are all UI things, and the UI is where Pharo
>>>>>>> and Squeak are least compatible.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm being a bit rude in that I don't yet have a fix for the issue.
>>>>>>> Ideally, a ConfigurationOf would have Pharo specific stuff and Squeak
>>>>>>> specific stuff in separate sections, with only the shared things
>>>>>>> (right now, not Glamour, nor its dependents) in the #'common' section.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, if someone doesn't beat me to it, I'll submit a fix soon,
>>>>>>> once Squeak 4.4 is out the door.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> frank
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>

> Frank Shearar-3 wrote
>> Even though I haven't nailed the offline loading, given that this
>> configuration fixes the described issue and works when you _do_ have
>> an internet connection, who should I talk to about getting this merged
>> in?
>
> This sounds like a more general Metacello issue, no? I remember Dale and I
> did some work on this last year... maybe mention the problem you're having
> on the Metacello list... may be fixed already, or be a valuable addition to
> MetaC...

> On 9 February 2013 13:38, Sean P. DeNigris <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Frank Shearar-3 wrote
>>> Even though I haven't nailed the offline loading, given that this
>>> configuration fixes the described issue and works when you _do_ have
>>> an internet connection, who should I talk to about getting this merged
>>> in?
>>
>> This sounds like a more general Metacello issue, no? I remember Dale and I
>> did some work on this last year... maybe mention the problem you're having
>> on the Metacello list... may be fixed already, or be a valuable addition to
>> MetaC...
>
> It is, in the sense that (last time I checked at least), Metacello
> doesn't separate the defining of the structure of something and
> locating that thing.
>
> If I may use Maven or Leiningen as an example, a pom.xml or
> project.clj file only defines the logical structure of something. You
> don't ever say "and this is where you get this" except in profiles,
> which are independent of the project specification.
>
> But in the sense of "PetitParser's ConfigurationOf's #common stanza is
> a bit broken", it's not a Metacello issue, but an absent owner issue.
> When I've sent Lukas fixes before he's told me quite clearly that I
> should be sending them to the Pharo list, but... who's going to
> actually review/apply/reject this fix?