System -> About in Dev images

El lun, 11-01-2010 a las 23:41 +0100, Mariano Martinez Peck escribió:

>
>
> 2010/1/11 Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez <[hidden email]>
>         El lun, 11-01-2010 a las 22:06 +0000, Michael Roberts
>         escribió:
>         > I'm afraid i've got rather lost in this thread.
>         >
>         > >>  As an after thought after seeing other posts on the
>         issue, I think
>         > >>  more  than  a  generic  warning  that "may  break  the
>          image"  the
>         > >>  Monticello comments and/or a  simple explanation on the
>         reasons and
>         > >>  affected  packages *before*  the update  starts with
>          an  option to
>         > >>  proceed or abort is much in need.
>         > >>
>         > >>
>         > >>  Yes, maybe.  Then thing  is that I  am not  sure in
>         which  cases it
>         > >> would break. Only  in overrides? How many overrides  do
>         we have from
>         > >> external pacakges in Core stuff?  I have no idea.
>         > >
>         >
>         > I think given that we are at a very early stage of building
>         the Pharo
>         > image from PharoCore i.e Metacello just coming on etc, we
>         should
>         > simplify the concerns above.
>         >
>         > Basically we should only build Pharo on top of a known
>         PharoCore. Just
>         > because packages don't contain overrides does not imply that
>         moving
>         > the core image will break packages on top. Don't offer such
>         a feature,
>         > and then worry about what will happen.
>         >
>         > Part of the Pharo build script should set a flag that
>         prevents system
>         > update in the short term. Longer term we should switch the
>         available
>         > update mechanism to #loadLatest on the
>         ConfigurationOfPharo.  There is
>         > then one System update feature, but different implementation
>         in Pharo
>         > vs PharoCore.
>         >
>
>
>         So the vote is for disabled for now?
>
>
>
> Yes. And this is cool because we have to put focus in to make Pharo
> images more stable. We cannot introduce such a feature when we are not
> even stable with Dev images. Let's go step by step. Once we get stable
> Dev images, good processes and package managment, then we can review
> this stuff about updating.
>
>
> Do you want to do it ?  ;)
>

Yes, I will do it, but tomorrow. 

My idea is to make this a preference
and the the build script just disable it.

More tomorrow.

Cheers

>
>         > cheers,
>         > Mike
>         >
>         > _______________________________________________
>         > Pharo-project mailing list
>         > [hidden email]
>         >
>         http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>
>
>         --
>         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

--
Miguel Cobá
http://miguel.leugim.com.mx


_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project