Managing Pharo external packages with Metacello, please read!

> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 6:24 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Mariano
>
> I really want to have a separate folder for each version.
> If this does not work then we will try something else. Why because I would like to have distribution.
> Dale implemented a kind of freeze mechanism that copies all the dependent package of a project.
> Then publishing to a given folder is a publication act and I like that it is explicit. It take less than a minute to copy
> the given file to the 10 and 1.1 repository.
>
> Now about you last point. Yes we need to freeze the version because loading the latest will not work and you want that people
> just say load and not load: 14.2 here and load: 0.25 there. I'm correct?
>
> Yes...imagine today you copy your Conf to Pharo10MetacelloConfiguration ... today the working version for Pharo 1.0 is  1.4.5.
> Then...you continue to develop. Of course, using the same conf. Then you have version 1.5, 1.6, 1.6.2 , etc
> Suppose that now we have Pharo1.1 and you do the same: you copy your new version of the conf to Pharo11MetacelloConfiguration.
> How do people know WHICH version of the conf work for EACH pharo version ?   That's why I had the idea that every developer implement load to instead of loading the last version, to load the last version that WORKS for that Pharo version.
>
> So probably, the conf you copy to Pharo10MetacelloRepository may be
> load
>         self version: '1.0.xx'  load
>
> and in Parho11MetacelloRepository  it would be
>
> load
>        seld version: '1.6.xxx'
>
>  this is just an example.
>
> Having this, it also gives us an API: Everybody will know how to install it: just evaluate load.
> And "us" can be extended to a bot -> continuous integration.
>
>  
> What is the alternative?
>
> Stef
>
>
> > Hi folks. We have been discussing a lot what to do with the Metacello configurations of all projects and MetacelloRepository.
> > We want several things:
> >
> > - Have an specific catalog of the working and tested packages/projects for each Pharo release (1.0, 1.1, etc).
> > - Be able to have a hudson server running and testing such configurations.
> > - Unified way to load a project.
> >
> > For such objectives, we propose the following scheme:
> >
> > 1) We create a squeaksource repository called Pharo10MetacelloRepository
> > 2) All the Metacello configurations that are known and tested to work perfect in Pharo1.0, are copied to such repository. (this takes 2 minutes)
> > 3) Now, we have the problem of WHICH version from the conf class should be the one that loads and works in Pharo 1.0. So, once you copied the configuration, then you have to implement a class side method "load" that loads the exact version that should work in Pharo1.0. This version may not be the last. And you already may have defined "load" to load the last version. In such case, you can just change it for the version in the Pharo10MetacelloRepository. Otherwise, we can use another message. Give us your opinion.
> >
> > So the idea is that all developers/maintainers of Metacello configurations, do that and publish it. With this, if you want to know which projects work on Pharo 1.0 you just browser Pharo10MetacelloRepository, load the repository you want, and you know that just doing "ConfigurationOfXXX" load will do the job.
> >
> > In addition to this, we are able to have a hudson server that every XX time, it scans the repository, and for each project it tries to load it and report if there is a problem. We can even make that "load" loads also the tests and make Hudson to run the tests. Or if you want we can use another message than load.
> >
> > So...this is just an idea. But we need feedback and hear opinions. Because Pharo 1.1 will be soon and would be great to have this already working for Pharo 1.0.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Mariano
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pharo-project mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

> Hi folks. We have been discussing a lot what to do with the Metacello
> configurations of all projects and MetacelloRepository.
> We want several things:
>
> - Have an specific catalog of the working and tested packages/projects
> for each Pharo release (1.0, 1.1, etc).
> - Be able to have a hudson server running and testing such
> configurations.
> - Unified way to load a project.
>
> For such objectives, we propose the following scheme:
>
> 1) We create a squeaksource repository called
> Pharo10MetacelloRepository
> 2) All the Metacello configurations that are known and tested to work
> perfect in Pharo1.0, are copied to such repository. (this takes 2
> minutes)
> 3) Now, we have the problem of WHICH version from the conf class
> should be the one that loads and works in Pharo 1.0. So, once you
> copied the configuration, then you have to implement a class side
> method "load" that loads the exact version that should work in
> Pharo1.0. This version may not be the last. And you already may have
> defined "load" to load the last version. In such case, you can just
> change it for the version in the Pharo10MetacelloRepository.
> Otherwise, we can use another message. Give us your opinion.
>
> So the idea is that all developers/maintainers of Metacello
> configurations, do that and publish it. With this, if you want to know
> which projects work on Pharo 1.0 you just browser
> Pharo10MetacelloRepository, load the repository you want, and you know
> that just doing "ConfigurationOfXXX" load will do the job.
>
> In addition to this, we are able to have a hudson server that every XX
> time, it scans the repository, and for each project it tries to load
> it and report if there is a problem. We can even make that "load"
> loads also the tests and make Hudson to run the tests. Or if you want
> we can use another message than load.
>
> So...this is just an idea. But we need feedback and hear opinions.
> Because Pharo 1.1 will be soon and would be great to have this already
> working for Pharo 1.0.
>
> Thanks
>
> Mariano

>
> Stef
>
>
> > I was thinking about the "folders" to store copies of ConfigurationOfXXX
> > for a given release. I think that this will have problems, for example
> > for the simplest package that load fine in 3 consecutive release we will
> > have exactly 3 copies of the ConfigurationOfXXX package (not that the
> > disk space is a problem). On the other side, if a package has 19
> > versions for a given release (lets say RFB has 19 version methods in the
> > ConfigurationOfXXX for Pharo 1.0), then when Pharo 2.0 is released, a
> > copy of it will be made. This copy will be full, having the 19 version
> > methods, or you just take the last version method. Also, what about the
> > pre/post do its, they will likely be similar or exactly equal between
> > releases of Pharo.
> > If you delete the methods, you also lost the history and the opportunity
> > that new users can learn or use the previous versions.
> >
> > Some time ago I proposed the idea that Metacello should have tags to
> > mark that a version method has been tested in a given fork/release. As
> > the time pass, the tags in a method will grow to mark the version has
> > been tested on.
> > But for this to work, Metacello or the tools (I would prefer Metacello)
> > must honor this tags and before loading the code in a given image by
> > comparing what image is being installed on.
> >
> > Lets put an example:
> >
> > 1. Initial creation of the configuration for package Package for Pharo
> > 1.0 uploaded to MetacelloRepository:
> >
> > ConfigurationOfPackage>>baseline01
> > "initial baseline"
> >
> > ConfigurationOfPackage>>version01: spec
> >  <version: '0.1'>
> >
> >  spec for: #common do: [
> >    spec blessing: #release.
> >    spec worksIn: 'Pharo1.0'
> >    ... ].
> >
> > 2. A new version for Pharo 1.0 (lets say a bug fix):
> >
> > ConfigurationOfPackage>>version02: spec
> >  <version: '0.2'>
> >
> >  spec for: #common do: [
> >    spec blessing: #release.
> >    spec worksIn: 'Pharo1.0'
> >    ... ].
> >
> > 3. A new Pharo release is made, no changes to the package are needed,
> > that is, it works correctly in Pharo1.0 and Pharo 1.1
> >
> > ConfigurationOfPackage>>version03: spec
> >  <version: '0.3'>
> >
> >  spec for: #common do: [
> >    spec blessing: #release.
> >    spec worksIn: #( 'Pharo1.0' 'Pharo1.1' )
> >    ... ].
> >
> > At this point the ConfigurationOfPackage has four methods: baseline and
> > three versions. Also, before loading, Metacello checks the worksIn:
> > list against a standard release string in the image is working on. If
> > it match it install the package. That is, if I start with a Pharo1.1
> > image and load the configuration, the only possible candidate version
> > to install is the 0.3, because is the only one marked to work in Pharo1.1.
> >
> > 4. A port to Squeak 5 is made. This likely will need a new baseline
> > because will need squeak specific packages to be included
> > (compatibility packages) and also maybe a Pharo compatibility package
> > will be made. Anyway, a new baseline indicating new packages
> > relationships will be made:
> >
> > ConfigurationOfPackage>>baseline02
> > "second baseline, it accounts for install in Pharo and Squeak"
> >
> > ConfigurationOfPackage>>version04: spec
> >  <version: '0.4'>
> >
> >  spec for: #common do: [
> >    spec blessing: #release.
> >    spec worksIn: #( 'Pharo1.0' 'Pharo1.1' 'Squeak5.0' )
> >    ... ].
> >  spec for: #squeak do: [
> >    ... ].
> >  spec for: #pharo do: [
> >    ... ].
> >
> > At this point the ConfigurationOfXXX is capable of install the last
> > version in Squeak and Pharo.
> >
> > If I start on Squeak 4.0 then even if I load the
> > ConfigurationOfPackage, no package will be installed because nobody has tested this.
> >
> > If I start on Squeak 5.0 only version 0.4 can be installed.
> >
> > If I start on Pharo 1.0 versions 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4 can be installed
> >
> > If I start on Pharo 1.3 no package will be installed
> >
> > 5. Nobody updates the configuration for the Squeak 6.0 and 7.0 releases
> > but new versions are created for Pharo 1.3 and Pharo1.4. The code no longer works in Pharo 1.0 and Pharo1.1
> >
> > ConfigurationOfPackage>>baseline08
> > "second baseline, it accounts for install in Pharo and Squeak"
> >
> > ConfigurationOfPackage>>version09: spec
> >  <version: '0.9'>
> >
> >  spec for: #common do: [
> >    spec blessing: #release.
> >    spec worksIn: #( 'Pharo1.3' 'Pharo1.4' )
> >    ... ].
> >  spec for: #pharo do: [
> >    ... ].
> >
> > 6. Installing on Squeak 8 is again supported together with support for Squeak 7.0:
> >
> > ConfigurationOfPackage>>baseline04
> > "third baseline, it accounts for install in Pharo and Squeak"
> >
> > ConfigurationOfPackage>>version10: spec
> >  <version: '1.0'>
> >
> >  spec for: #common do: [
> >    spec blessing: #release.
> >    spec worksIn: #( 'Pharo1.3' 'Pharo1.4' 'Squeak7.0' 'Squeak8.0' )
> >    ... ].
> >  spec for: #squeak do: [
> >    ... ].
> >  spec for: #pharo do: [
> >    ... ].
> >
> > So the tags come and go as the support for given forks and releases are
> > tested.
> > Different versions of the Package package can work in different forks
> > and in different releases of those forks.
> > It is always the job of the interested parties to add support (that is
> > version methods and baselines, or simply tags to the worksIn: list) for
> > a package in a given combination.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Cheers
> >
> > --
> > Miguel Cobá
> > http://miguel.leugim.com.mx
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Pharo-project mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project