Removing of Universe classes

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
15 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Removing of Universe classes

Hannes Hirzel
On 11/25/15, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 24 November 2015 at 21:09, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 11/21/15, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 12:40 PM, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote:


>>>> I suggest we should Universes.


>>> +1.  +1.  +1 and, +1.
..

>
> I was under the impression that Universes _was removed_, like, back in
> 4.4 or the beginning of the 4.5 cycle, when I was up to my eyeballs in
> hairy dependencies... Certainly the build processes think so -
> https://github.com/squeak-smalltalk/squeak-ci/blob/master/package-load-scripts/Universes.st
> is the _load script_ for Universes (implying its _unloaded by default_
> state).
>
> frank
>
>> I think this has been discussed before the release of 4.6 and people
>> agreed but at that time it was to late to do it.
>>
>> --Hannes
>>
>
>
Hi Frank

Indeed I do not see a Universe browser in the app menu of Squeak 5.0.

However there seem to be some classes left in the system, see screen shot.

So there was removal but it seems it was not done completely.



Removing_of_Universe_classes_in_Squeak5.0_2015-11-25.png (36K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Removing of Universe classes

Karl Ramberg
Universes was removed from menus because it was not functional.

To remove Universes from Trunk one has to take into  account the update number. 
I think the update number is the sum of all package versions ?

I'm not sure how one does this.

Best,
Karl

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 1:39 PM, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 11/25/15, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 24 November 2015 at 21:09, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 11/21/15, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 12:40 PM, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote:


>>>> I suggest we should Universes.


>>> +1.  +1.  +1 and, +1.
..

>
> I was under the impression that Universes _was removed_, like, back in
> 4.4 or the beginning of the 4.5 cycle, when I was up to my eyeballs in
> hairy dependencies... Certainly the build processes think so -
> https://github.com/squeak-smalltalk/squeak-ci/blob/master/package-load-scripts/Universes.st
> is the _load script_ for Universes (implying its _unloaded by default_
> state).
>
> frank
>
>> I think this has been discussed before the release of 4.6 and people
>> agreed but at that time it was to late to do it.
>>
>> --Hannes
>>
>
>

Hi Frank

Indeed I do not see a Universe browser in the app menu of Squeak 5.0.

However there seem to be some classes left in the system, see screen shot.

So there was removal but it seems it was not done completely.






Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Removing of Universe classes

Hannes Hirzel
Thanks, Karl,  for this piece of information. I have updated
Package Universes
http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/3785
accordingly.

--HH

On 11/25/15, karl ramberg <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Universes was removed from menus because it was not functional.
>
> To remove Universes from Trunk one has to take into  account the update
> number.
> I think the update number is the sum of all package versions ?
>
> I'm not sure how one does this.
>
> Best,
> Karl
>
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 1:39 PM, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> On 11/25/15, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > On 24 November 2015 at 21:09, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]>
>> > wrote:
>> >> On 11/21/15, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 12:40 PM, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> >>>> I suggest we should Universes.
>>
>>
>> >>> +1.  +1.  +1 and, +1.
>> ..
>>
>> >
>> > I was under the impression that Universes _was removed_, like, back in
>> > 4.4 or the beginning of the 4.5 cycle, when I was up to my eyeballs in
>> > hairy dependencies... Certainly the build processes think so -
>> >
>> https://github.com/squeak-smalltalk/squeak-ci/blob/master/package-load-scripts/Universes.st
>> > is the _load script_ for Universes (implying its _unloaded by default_
>> > state).
>> >
>> > frank
>> >
>> >> I think this has been discussed before the release of 4.6 and people
>> >> agreed but at that time it was to late to do it.
>> >>
>> >> --Hannes
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Hi Frank
>>
>> Indeed I do not see a Universe browser in the app menu of Squeak 5.0.
>>
>> However there seem to be some classes left in the system, see screen
>> shot.
>>
>> So there was removal but it seems it was not done completely.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Removing of Universe classes

Levente Uzonyi-2
In reply to this post by Karl Ramberg
This question comes up from time to time.
There's an empty package named Squeak-Version in the image. When you
unload a package, let's say Universes-mt.48, you add 49 (48 + 1) to the
version number of Squeak-Version and save it as well to ensure that the
global Squeak version number keeps increasing.

Levente

On Wed, 25 Nov 2015, karl ramberg wrote:

> Universes was removed from menus because it was not functional.
>
> To remove Universes from Trunk one has to take into  account the update number. I think the update number is the sum of all package versions ?
>
> I'm not sure how one does this.
>
> Best,
> Karl
>
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 1:39 PM, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>       On 11/25/15, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
>       > On 24 November 2015 at 21:09, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote:
>       >> On 11/21/15, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
>       >>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 12:40 PM, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
>       >>>> I suggest we should Universes.
>
>
>       >>> +1.  +1.  +1 and, +1.
>       ..
>
>       >
>       > I was under the impression that Universes _was removed_, like, back in
>       > 4.4 or the beginning of the 4.5 cycle, when I was up to my eyeballs in
>       > hairy dependencies... Certainly the build processes think so -
>       > https://github.com/squeak-smalltalk/squeak-ci/blob/master/package-load-scripts/Universes.st
>       > is the _load script_ for Universes (implying its _unloaded by default_
>       > state).
>       >
>       > frank
>       >
>       >> I think this has been discussed before the release of 4.6 and people
>       >> agreed but at that time it was to late to do it.
>       >>
>       >> --Hannes
>       >>
>       >
>       >
>
>       Hi Frank
>
>       Indeed I do not see a Universe browser in the app menu of Squeak 5.0.
>
>       However there seem to be some classes left in the system, see screen shot.
>
>       So there was removal but it seems it was not done completely.
>
>
>
>
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Removing of Universe classes

Edgar J. De Cleene-3

Any code changing the image as loading a package from trunk should end in a
numbered change set.

This is how Cuis works and how Squeak should work.

And please , get rid of Squeak-Version also.
As we have automatic procedures, we should have a way of made reliable
change sets and put this change sets in GitHub


On 11/25/15, 10:50 AM, "Levente Uzonyi" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> This question comes up from time to time.
> There's an empty package named Squeak-Version in the image. When you
> unload a package, let's say Universes-mt.48, you add 49 (48 + 1) to the
> version number of Squeak-Version and save it as well to ensure that the
> global Squeak version number keeps increasing.
>
> Levente



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Removing of Universe classes

Frank Shearar-3
On 25 November 2015 at 13:59, Edgar J. De Cleene <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Any code changing the image as loading a package from trunk should end in a
> numbered change set.
>
> This is how Cuis works and how Squeak should work.
>
> And please , get rid of Squeak-Version also.
> As we have automatic procedures, we should have a way of made reliable
> change sets and put this change sets in GitHub

We can't, without a fair amount of work. Your squeak "version" is the
sum of versions of all the base packages. When we remove packages from
the base system, we must bump Squeak-Version's version by the removed
package's version number, so that the aggregate version number doesn't
decrease.

It's a bit crazy (because if you and I both have packages Foo and Bar,
but my Foo is one version ahead of yours, and my Bar one version
behind, the aggregate version number is the same), but it's what's
there. And fixing it won't be easy - to do it reliably you'd have to
record the versions of the individual packages - you'd have a _version
vector_.

frank

> On 11/25/15, 10:50 AM, "Levente Uzonyi" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> This question comes up from time to time.
>> There's an empty package named Squeak-Version in the image. When you
>> unload a package, let's say Universes-mt.48, you add 49 (48 + 1) to the
>> version number of Squeak-Version and save it as well to ensure that the
>> global Squeak version number keeps increasing.
>>
>> Levente

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Removing of Universe classes

Hannes Hirzel
Frank,

what would you propose as the solution then?

Just delete all the classes in  the Universes package and remove the
references to it and keep the empty package?

--Hannes

On 11/25/15, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 25 November 2015 at 13:59, Edgar J. De Cleene <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>>
>> Any code changing the image as loading a package from trunk should end in
>> a
>> numbered change set.
>>
>> This is how Cuis works and how Squeak should work.
>>
>> And please , get rid of Squeak-Version also.
>> As we have automatic procedures, we should have a way of made reliable
>> change sets and put this change sets in GitHub
>
> We can't, without a fair amount of work. Your squeak "version" is the
> sum of versions of all the base packages. When we remove packages from
> the base system, we must bump Squeak-Version's version by the removed
> package's version number, so that the aggregate version number doesn't
> decrease.
>
> It's a bit crazy (because if you and I both have packages Foo and Bar,
> but my Foo is one version ahead of yours, and my Bar one version
> behind, the aggregate version number is the same), but it's what's
> there. And fixing it won't be easy - to do it reliably you'd have to
> record the versions of the individual packages - you'd have a _version
> vector_.
>
> frank
>
>> On 11/25/15, 10:50 AM, "Levente Uzonyi" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> This question comes up from time to time.
>>> There's an empty package named Squeak-Version in the image. When you
>>> unload a package, let's say Universes-mt.48, you add 49 (48 + 1) to the
>>> version number of Squeak-Version and save it as well to ensure that the
>>> global Squeak version number keeps increasing.
>>>
>>> Levente
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Removing of Universe classes

Karl Ramberg
In reply to this post by Levente Uzonyi-2
Hi,

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 2:50 PM, Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]> wrote:
This question comes up from time to time.
There's an empty package named Squeak-Version in the image. When you unload a package, let's say Universes-mt.48, you add 49 (48 + 1) to the version number of Squeak-Version and save it as well to ensure that the global Squeak version number keeps increasing.

So one just changes the version number in the dialog box when one saves a new version ?

As far as unloading the Universes, where do one put the unloading script ?

And the unload script is like:

(MCPackage named: 'Universes') workingCopy unload

Best,
Karl


Levente


On Wed, 25 Nov 2015, karl ramberg wrote:

Universes was removed from menus because it was not functional.

To remove Universes from Trunk one has to take into  account the update number. I think the update number is the sum of all package versions ?

I'm not sure how one does this.

Best,
Karl

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 1:39 PM, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote:
      On 11/25/15, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:
      > On 24 November 2015 at 21:09, H. Hirzel <[hidden email]> wrote:
      >> On 11/21/15, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
      >>> On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 12:40 PM, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote:


      >>>> I suggest we should Universes.


      >>> +1.  +1.  +1 and, +1.
      ..

      >
      > I was under the impression that Universes _was removed_, like, back in
      > 4.4 or the beginning of the 4.5 cycle, when I was up to my eyeballs in
      > hairy dependencies... Certainly the build processes think so -
      > https://github.com/squeak-smalltalk/squeak-ci/blob/master/package-load-scripts/Universes.st
      > is the _load script_ for Universes (implying its _unloaded by default_
      > state).
      >
      > frank
      >
      >> I think this has been discussed before the release of 4.6 and people
      >> agreed but at that time it was to late to do it.
      >>
      >> --Hannes
      >>
      >
      >

      Hi Frank

      Indeed I do not see a Universe browser in the app menu of Squeak 5.0.

      However there seem to be some classes left in the system, see screen shot.

      So there was removal but it seems it was not done completely.











Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Removing of Universe classes

Levente Uzonyi-2
In reply to this post by Frank Shearar-3
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015, Frank Shearar wrote:

> On 25 November 2015 at 13:59, Edgar J. De Cleene <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Any code changing the image as loading a package from trunk should end in a
>> numbered change set.
>>
>> This is how Cuis works and how Squeak should work.
>>
>> And please , get rid of Squeak-Version also.
>> As we have automatic procedures, we should have a way of made reliable
>> change sets and put this change sets in GitHub
>
> We can't, without a fair amount of work. Your squeak "version" is the
> sum of versions of all the base packages. When we remove packages from
> the base system, we must bump Squeak-Version's version by the removed
> package's version number, so that the aggregate version number doesn't
> decrease.
>
> It's a bit crazy (because if you and I both have packages Foo and Bar,
> but my Foo is one version ahead of yours, and my Bar one version
> behind, the aggregate version number is the same), but it's what's
> there. And fixing it won't be easy - to do it reliably you'd have to
> record the versions of the individual packages - you'd have a _version
> vector_.

I don't think there's anything to fix here. The version number is only
meaningful in a Trunk image, and it only has to be consistent after
updates. So it does exactly what it has to do.

Levente

>
> frank
>
>> On 11/25/15, 10:50 AM, "Levente Uzonyi" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> This question comes up from time to time.
>>> There's an empty package named Squeak-Version in the image. When you
>>> unload a package, let's say Universes-mt.48, you add 49 (48 + 1) to the
>>> version number of Squeak-Version and save it as well to ensure that the
>>> global Squeak version number keeps increasing.
>>>
>>> Levente
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Removing of Universe classes

Frank Shearar-3
On 25 November 2015 at 16:51, Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed, 25 Nov 2015, Frank Shearar wrote:
>
>> On 25 November 2015 at 13:59, Edgar J. De Cleene <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Any code changing the image as loading a package from trunk should end in
>>> a
>>> numbered change set.
>>>
>>> This is how Cuis works and how Squeak should work.
>>>
>>> And please , get rid of Squeak-Version also.
>>> As we have automatic procedures, we should have a way of made reliable
>>> change sets and put this change sets in GitHub
>>
>>
>> We can't, without a fair amount of work. Your squeak "version" is the
>> sum of versions of all the base packages. When we remove packages from
>> the base system, we must bump Squeak-Version's version by the removed
>> package's version number, so that the aggregate version number doesn't
>> decrease.
>>
>> It's a bit crazy (because if you and I both have packages Foo and Bar,
>> but my Foo is one version ahead of yours, and my Bar one version
>> behind, the aggregate version number is the same), but it's what's
>> there. And fixing it won't be easy - to do it reliably you'd have to
>> record the versions of the individual packages - you'd have a _version
>> vector_.
>
>
> I don't think there's anything to fix here. The version number is only
> meaningful in a Trunk image, and it only has to be consistent after updates.
> So it does exactly what it has to do.

Yeah, maybe "fix" is a bit of hyperbole. "Fixing" the Squeak trunk
version is like saying "the version of my operating system is Windows
10 + VS 2013.4 + Git 2.6.2 + ...". No one actually does that.

The thing called "Cuis" is versioned across the packages in the base
system. That's pretty close to what we do, kinda. Maybe in fact "the
Squeak trunk version" should only be calculated by the sum of packages
in the MCM... but I suspect that's exactly what we _actually do_. So
THEN, when we remove packages from the base system (as in, it's not
part of the base system anymore), we have the number deficit that
Squeak-Version fixes.

Er. That might be a long-winded "carry on, nothing to see here."

frank

> Levente
>
>
>>
>> frank
>>
>>> On 11/25/15, 10:50 AM, "Levente Uzonyi" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> This question comes up from time to time.
>>>> There's an empty package named Squeak-Version in the image. When you
>>>> unload a package, let's say Universes-mt.48, you add 49 (48 + 1) to the
>>>> version number of Squeak-Version and save it as well to ensure that the
>>>> global Squeak version number keeps increasing.
>>>>
>>>> Levente
>>
>>
>>
>

cbc
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Fwd: Removing of Universe classes

cbc
In reply to this post by Levente Uzonyi-2
This one

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]>
Date: Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 5:50 AM
Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] Removing of Universe classes
To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <[hidden email]>


This question comes up from time to time.
There's an empty package named Squeak-Version in the image. When you unload a package, let's say Universes-mt.48, you add 49 (48 + 1) to the version number of Squeak-Version and save it as well to ensure that the global Squeak version number keeps increasing.

Levente



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Removing of Universe classes

Eliot Miranda-2
Hi Chris,

    but Squeak-Version is itself empty and the version info in ReleaseBuilder would appear to have obsoleted it.  Shouldn't we also remove Squeak-Version?

_,,,^..^,,,_ (phone)

On Jan 24, 2018, at 12:58 PM, Chris Cunningham <[hidden email]> wrote:

This one

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]>
Date: Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 5:50 AM
Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] Removing of Universe classes
To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <[hidden email]>


This question comes up from time to time.
There's an empty package named Squeak-Version in the image. When you unload a package, let's say Universes-mt.48, you add 49 (48 + 1) to the version number of Squeak-Version and save it as well to ensure that the global Squeak version number keeps increasing.

Levente




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Removing of Universe classes

marcel.taeumel
The ReleaseBuilder does not deal with the build number. We do need that offset in Squeak-Version to compute our build number.

Best,
Marcel

Am 25.01.2018 15:57:31 schrieb Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]>:

Hi Chris,

    but Squeak-Version is itself empty and the version info in ReleaseBuilder would appear to have obsoleted it.  Shouldn't we also remove Squeak-Version?

_,,,^..^,,,_ (phone)

On Jan 24, 2018, at 12:58 PM, Chris Cunningham <[hidden email]> wrote:

This one

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]>
Date: Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 5:50 AM
Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] Removing of Universe classes
To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <[hidden email]>


This question comes up from time to time.
There's an empty package named Squeak-Version in the image. When you unload a package, let's say Universes-mt.48, you add 49 (48 + 1) to the version number of Squeak-Version and save it as well to ensure that the global Squeak version number keeps increasing.

Levente




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Removing of Universe classes

Eliot Miranda-2
Hi Marcel,

On Jan 25, 2018, at 7:42 AM, Marcel Taeumel <[hidden email]> wrote:

The ReleaseBuilder does not deal with the build number. We do need that offset in Squeak-Version to compute our build number.

Then I suggest it contain a class called SqueakVersion whose class comment includes the gist of Levente's message and whose two method categories, class & instance side, are called 'read the class comment' ;-)
 
Best,
Marcel

Am 25.01.2018 15:57:31 schrieb Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]>:

Hi Chris,

    but Squeak-Version is itself empty and the version info in ReleaseBuilder would appear to have obsoleted it.  Shouldn't we also remove Squeak-Version?

_,,,^..^,,,_ (phone)

On Jan 24, 2018, at 12:58 PM, Chris Cunningham <[hidden email]> wrote:

This one

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]>
Date: Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 5:50 AM
Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] Removing of Universe classes
To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <[hidden email]>


This question comes up from time to time.
There's an empty package named Squeak-Version in the image. When you unload a package, let's say Universes-mt.48, you add 49 (48 + 1) to the version number of Squeak-Version and save it as well to ensure that the global Squeak version number keeps increasing.

Levente





Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Fwd: Removing of Universe classes

Kjell Godo

On Thu, Jan 25, 2018 at 08:11 Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Marcel,

On Jan 25, 2018, at 7:42 AM, Marcel Taeumel <[hidden email]> wrote:

The ReleaseBuilder does not deal with the build number. We do need that offset in Squeak-Version to compute our build number.

Then I suggest it contain a class called SqueakVersion whose class comment includes the gist of Levente's message and whose two method categories, class & instance side, are called 'read the class comment' ;-)

+++++++ 1

i think this comment idea is a good idea
          and i will use it in future if i ever get to     because
     people not in the know would know then
          but who cares about them
          but how long would it take to put this Class in
          but if there was no head scratching or head banging
          would not people feel that something is missing ?
               and say 
                   TRA-DI-TION
                         and the weight of all the previous nothing pray
                         tell : no-leave the head scratching and banging in
               or
                    i didn’t know you were going to chide me
                         now i definitely will not do anything you said


but i definitely will do this if i ever get to

because people not in the know will probably be me
     in another day or two

     according to me and that guy who made erLang
          who made some forlorn plea for just such a mercy on a future he
          who is destined to head banging
          by today me
          who doesn’t see
               any need to avoid it
          as he notes that other genius who made that one single comment
               in all his years of lines of stuff     and it was
               “and now for the tricky part”

which leads me to     i can’t make head or tail of this

     TIME TO REWRITE THIS     THE WHOLE THING     the Whole thing has gone

     un maintainable 

in my day     we rewrote the whole thing    once a day

and you can’t just say     well here     you fix this
     
because you forgot that future me is not     in the know

and un maintainable here we come     when future me gets ahold of this one

maybe I’m just forgetful    and it’s just me

i do not have a forum on my own stuff to remind me
     at least not one i have access to please                             please me   the kgb
     or one that is more than half a bit 
     no no no no no no no no no

no wait there were yes-es     in the before time
     nothing but yes-es     now there is only no
          and everything is spitted and shut 
               down to go     time to scrape
               down to hell down to the 
               chinese bedrock of
               swiss cheese  
               that tells 
               just keep on scraping     a gaping     get a cheese cutter

               rewrite the whole f thing
               because the whole f thing has gone to the kells 
               and is spinning in infinity     due tell coq

did you know that in SE Asia the bank robbers are in the banks
     and so nobody has a bank account
     and so nobody has a Visa card 
     and so google is quitting
     man going to grab
     their crotch
     huh     imagine that

;-)



 
Best,
Marcel

Am 25.01.2018 15:57:31 schrieb Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]>:

Hi Chris,

    but Squeak-Version is itself empty and the version info in ReleaseBuilder would appear to have obsoleted it.  Shouldn't we also remove Squeak-Version?

_,,,^..^,,,_ (phone)

On Jan 24, 2018, at 12:58 PM, Chris Cunningham <[hidden email]> wrote:

This one

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]>
Date: Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 5:50 AM
Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] Removing of Universe classes
To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <[hidden email]>


This question comes up from time to time.
There's an empty package named Squeak-Version in the image. When you unload a package, let's say Universes-mt.48, you add 49 (48 + 1) to the version number of Squeak-Version and save it as well to ensure that the global Squeak version number keeps increasing.

Levente