> You can have a look at dale henrichs web page
>
>
http://gemstonesoup.wordpress.com/2009/08/25/metacello-package-management-for-monticello/>
> you can also have a look at Moose, mondrian .... on squeaksource.
> They are managed with metacello and we stress it :)
>
> Stef
My first look at metacello to appraise it.
It looks like a copy of Sake/Packages.
S/P stores package definitions in methods of a class, so does Metacello.
Metacello doesnt layer the dependency mechanism so that it can be used
for other things. Sake/Packages is layered on top of Sake.
Metacellos appears declarative and only declarative, whereas S/P can
execute arbitrary tasks or code.
Metacello's metadata fields appear fixed S/P's is not.
As far as I can see S/P had most of the functionality of Metacello, a
year before and it supports unloading.
I am not saying that S/P is perfect, it is not as "controlled" and
constrained as the Metacellos approach.
There are small improvements that S/P could add to make it equivalent.
For example each package definintion loads a single package in S/P in
Metacello a single package definition can load multiple packages which
makes for a more concise library. It would be a trivial change to
include.
enjoy
Keith
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Locked
