Smalltalk › Squeak › Squeak - Dev

Re: [Pharo-dev] It would be too expensive to add a description for packages in Configuration Browser?

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

2 messages Options

Eliot Miranda-2

Re: [Pharo-dev] It would be too expensive to add a description for packages in Configuration Browser?

Hi Hernán,

On Sat, Dec 7, 2013 at 11:44 AM, Hernán Morales Durand <[hidden email]> wrote:

Is there a specific reason why this was not implemented? Is someone working on this?

This is such a gaping hole in Monticello. I hope Pharo and Squeak can implement this compatibly. I hope the repository web interfaces can display the latest version of the package description too. And I also hope that any extension can be backward-compatible.

See the "Perl Package Manager" for example.

When you launch it, takes some time to update but each item displays the Details and you have an Abstract colum.

Cheers,

Hernán

--
best,

Eliot

Chris Muller-3

Re: [Pharo-dev] It would be too expensive to add a description for packages in Configuration Browser?

> This is such a gaping hole in Monticello. I hope Pharo and Squeak can

I don't see it as a Monticello responsibility. MC should remain
concerned solely with SCM. Configuration should be handled one layer
above it. Whether by Metacello, SqueakMap, Installer, PackageInfo,
Universes or something else of the configurators choice.

> implement this compatibly. I hope the repository web interfaces can display
> the latest version of the package description too.

Which package do you mean by "the package"? Currently, package
version comments _are_ already displayed by the web-interface. (So,
this supports that we should not let the SCM tool dual as a
Configurator).