install Seaside30 without OB?
Locked
 
|
Hi,
I want to install Seaside 3.0.3 into a production image, and I want to get rid of OmniBrowser... which groups should I specify to obtain this? Cheers, Esteban_______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Re: install Seaside30 without OB?
|
|
Hi Esteban,
You need 'Base' and one of the adaptor packages (e.g. 'Seaside-Adaptors-Comanche') But then.... it depends on which parts you need: jQuery, jQueryUI, etc... : you have to specify the packages you want. btw: because 'Core' also loads the Seaside-Tools, it will also load the OB. I just did the same exercise and, after a few runs, you will find all the missing parts. On 05 Jan 2011, at 12:31, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > Hi, > I want to install Seaside 3.0.3 into a production image, and I want to get rid of OmniBrowser... which groups should I specify to obtain this? > > Cheers, > Esteban_______________________________________________ > seaside mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside _______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Re: install Seaside30 without OB?
|
|
In reply to this post by EstebanLM
Questions:
why is seaside coupled to (or depending on) OB? <-- this one is genuine Is because of WABrowser and the halo stuff (that is cool but you never use)? <--- this is the rhetorical one On Jan 5, 2011, at 9:31 AM, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > Hi, > I want to install Seaside 3.0.3 into a production image, and I want to get rid of OmniBrowser... which groups should I specify to obtain this? > > Cheers, > Esteban_______________________________________________ > seaside mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside _______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Re: install Seaside30 without OB?
|
|
On 05 Jan 2011, at 16:10, Sebastian Sastre wrote: > why is seaside coupled to (or depending on) OB? <-- this one is genuine The Seaside-Tools package is coupled to OB > Is because of WABrowser and the halo stuff (that is cool but you never use)? <--- this is the rhetorical one No, those are not part of the Seaside-Tools package. cheers, Johan_______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Re: install Seaside30 without OB?
|
|
m... okay.. rephrasing:
why is 'Seaside-Tools package' coupled to (or depending on) OB? On Jan 5, 2011, at 1:17 PM, Johan Brichau wrote: > > On 05 Jan 2011, at 16:10, Sebastian Sastre wrote: > >> why is seaside coupled to (or depending on) OB? <-- this one is genuine > > The Seaside-Tools package is coupled to OB > >> Is because of WABrowser and the halo stuff (that is cool but you never use)? <--- this is the rhetorical one > > No, those are not part of the Seaside-Tools package. > > cheers, > Johan_______________________________________________ > seaside mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside _______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Re: install Seaside30 without OB?
|
|
I would not include 'Seaside-Tools' at all in the Core group and I would not put is as default.
I would create another group, that incldues the Core + Seaside-Tools + rest of the sutff and would put that group as default. This fixes the two problems: - newbies do not need to know which group to load and just the default will load the Seaside-Tools and all the necessary packages (probably all of them) - Advanced guys that need core, probably know how to use metacello, and they can just load Core for their images (even maybe only for production images) Cheers mariano On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Sebastian Sastre <[hidden email]> wrote: m... okay.. rephrasing: _______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
|
|
El 05/01/2011, a las 12:35p.m., Mariano Martinez Peck escribió: I would not include 'Seaside-Tools' at all in the Core group and I would not put is as default. +1
_______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Re: install Seaside30 without OB?
|
|
In reply to this post by sebastianconcept@gmail.co
On 05 Jan 2011, at 16:22, Sebastian Sastre wrote: > why is 'Seaside-Tools package' coupled to (or depending on) OB? The technical answer is that (at least) the seaside control panel window is implemented using the OB framework. But I guess you are more wondering why that is the case, and that's not an answer I can give you. Johan_______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Re: install Seaside30 without OB?
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
On 05 Jan 2011, at 16:35, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > I would not include 'Seaside-Tools' at all in the Core group and I would not put is as default. > I would create another group, that incldues the Core + Seaside-Tools + rest of the sutff and would put that group as default. This fixes the two problems: > > - newbies do not need to know which group to load and just the default will load the Seaside-Tools and all the necessary packages (probably all of them) > - Advanced guys that need core, probably know how to use metacello, and they can just load Core for their images (even maybe only for production images) That's roughly the case actually. 'Base' is the minimal and then you need to add the stuff you need. The default group loads the entire development bundle. What I'm missing is perhaps an 'everything Seaside except the development tests and image tools' Or maybe I'm missing something... Johan_______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Re: install Seaside30 without OB?
|
|
In reply to this post by Johan Brichau-2
yeah, that kind of why, exactly. The one that exposes the meaning. The only one useful.
So, here is when the value of the rhetorical question kicks in: Here is the "open letter" to whoever decided that: 1. it sucks 2. we know you know it sucks 3. we know you can do better 4. we're watching On Jan 5, 2011, at 2:17 PM, Johan Brichau wrote: > > On 05 Jan 2011, at 16:22, Sebastian Sastre wrote: > >> why is 'Seaside-Tools package' coupled to (or depending on) OB? > > > The technical answer is that (at least) the seaside control panel window is implemented using the OB framework. > But I guess you are more wondering why that is the case, and that's not an answer I can give you. > > Johan_______________________________________________ > seaside mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside _______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Re: install Seaside30 without OB?
|
|
I'm curious: what is that 'better' than to be?
You don't _need_ those tools. They are just a handy addition when you're developing, which is when you have OB installed in an image anyway. For the record, I just noticed, it's just the Seaside-Tools-Omnibrowser package that is depending on OB. On 05 Jan 2011, at 17:56, Sebastian Sastre wrote: > yeah, that kind of why, exactly. The one that exposes the meaning. The only one useful. > > So, here is when the value of the rhetorical question kicks in: > > Here is the "open letter" to whoever decided that: > 1. it sucks > 2. we know you know it sucks > 3. we know you can do better > 4. we're watching > > > > > > On Jan 5, 2011, at 2:17 PM, Johan Brichau wrote: > >> >> On 05 Jan 2011, at 16:22, Sebastian Sastre wrote: >> >>> why is 'Seaside-Tools package' coupled to (or depending on) OB? >> >> >> The technical answer is that (at least) the seaside control panel window is implemented using the OB framework. >> But I guess you are more wondering why that is the case, and that's not an answer I can give you. >> >> Johan_______________________________________________ >> seaside mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside > > _______________________________________________ > seaside mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside _______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Re: install Seaside30 without OB?
|
|
better is anything that helps more people to get things done easier or cheaper or somehow more conveniently If that means that you need to do less, the do less. Just make it rock. For all of us. On Jan 5, 2011, at 3:08 PM, Johan Brichau wrote:
_______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Re: install Seaside30 without OB?
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
On 01/05/2011 07:35 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
> I would not include 'Seaside-Tools' at all in the Core group and I would > not put is as default. > I would create another group, that incldues the Core + Seaside-Tools + > rest of the sutff and would put that group as default. This fixes the > two problems: > > - newbies do not need to know which group to load and just the default > will load the Seaside-Tools and all the necessary packages (probably all > of them) > - Advanced guys that need core, probably know how to use metacello, and > they can just load Core for their images (even maybe only for production > images) > > Cheers > > mariano Mariano, et.al., Seaside30 has so many packages and so many possible _valid_ combinations of packages that it didn't make a lot of sense to try to define groups for all of the possible combos... It was decided over a long series of emails to create a 'Base' group that was the absolute minimum usable chunk of Seaside. The 'Core' group was then defined as everything else that came with Seaside excluding the tests. Note that the core group includes all of the development tools as well... The 'OneClick' group was added later to match the content of the 'OneClick' image (which basically excluded the LGPL packages) and included many tests. Now that there are folks who have some real needs it probably makes sense to take another look at creating some finer grained groups. So, if you run the following expression in a Pharo image, with the latest ConfigurationOfSeaside30: | version | version := ConfigurationOfSeaside30 project version: '3.0.3-commonBaseline'. ((version packages collect: [:each | each name ]) asSet difference: ((version groups detect: [:each | each name = 'Base']) includes) asSet) reject: [:each | each includesSubString: '-Tests-' ] You'll get the list of basic packages that are not included in the 'Base' group and are not test packages: 'RSS-Core' 'Seaside-InternetExplorer' 'Seaside-Welcome' 'Seaside-Email' 'Scriptaculous-Core' 'Seaside-Swazoo' 'Javascript-Core' 'Seaside-Adaptors-Swazoo' 'JQuery-UI' 'Seaside-Development' 'JQuery-Core' 'Seaside-HTML5' 'Seaside-Examples' 'Scriptaculous-Components' 'Seaside-Tools-Web' 'Seaside-Tools-OmniBrowser' 'Prototype-Core' 'RSS-Examples' If reasonable groups can be defined for these packages then we can start taking a look at the dependencies involved and go from there. If you want to look at the dependencies of the various packages (without parsing configurations), you can try printing the results of expressions like the following: (ConfigurationOfSeaside30 project version: '3.0.3') record: #('Seaside-Tools-OmniBrowser') You'll get a list of the packages that would have been loaded if you did a load and the list is in load order... Dale _______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Re: install Seaside30 without OB?
|
|
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Dale Henrichs <[hidden email]> wrote:
yes, that's true!!!
Hi Dale. This is what is misleading for me. I mean, from my point of view, development tools are not core. Just watching it form outside, I may call 'core' to what you call now 'base' and try to find a better name for what it is now in 'Core'.
_______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Re: install Seaside30 without OB?
|
|
On 01/05/2011 11:50 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
> > > On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Dale Henrichs <[hidden email] > <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: > ...snip > It was decided over a long series of emails to create a 'Base' group > that was the absolute minimum usable chunk of Seaside. > > The 'Core' group was then defined as everything else that came with > Seaside excluding the tests. Note that the core group includes all > of the development tools as well... > > > Hi Dale. This is what is misleading for me. I mean, from my point of > view, development tools are not core. Just watching it form outside, I > may call 'core' to what you call now 'base' and try to find a better > name for what it is now in 'Core'. > I understand. We included the 'kitchen sink' in the 'Core' to just cut down on the number of options ... in other words if you _don't know what you want_ then you get everything ... if you know what you want then you load the 'Base' group plus the other packages that you need ... With regards to 'development tools', consider that many of the Seaside-Development functionality is really useful to have installed in a production image, so the distinction between development and production is not as clear cut as you might think. For example, the debugger-based error handlers are necessary to debug a problem that is showing up in a production even though they are part of a package called Seaside-Development. Also, without the 'Seaside Control Panel' (which requires OB and started this discussion)) it is more difficult to configure and control the various adaptors that you will be using... unless you really know what you are doing. So the 'Seaside Control Panel' is another one of those tools that you'd want installed in a production image....unless you know what you are doing So in the end, I think that 'Core'/'default' should stay the way it is, but perhaps the remaining packages could be grouped in such a way that it is easier to pick and choose functionality to be loaded with the 'Base' group when you really know what you are doing ... Dale _______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
Re: install Seaside30 without OB?
|
|
On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 12:41 PM, Dale Henrichs <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 01/05/2011 11:50 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >> >> On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 7:29 PM, Dale Henrichs <[hidden email] >> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: >> > > ...snip > >> It was decided over a long series of emails to create a 'Base' group >> that was the absolute minimum usable chunk of Seaside. >> >> The 'Core' group was then defined as everything else that came with >> Seaside excluding the tests. Note that the core group includes all >> of the development tools as well... >> >> >> Hi Dale. This is what is misleading for me. I mean, from my point of >> view, development tools are not core. Just watching it form outside, I >> may call 'core' to what you call now 'base' and try to find a better >> name for what it is now in 'Core'. >> > > I understand. > > We included the 'kitchen sink' in the 'Core' to just cut down on the number > of options ... in other words if you _don't know what you want_ then you get > everything ... if you know what you want then you load the 'Base' group plus > the other packages that you need ... > > With regards to 'development tools', consider that many of the > Seaside-Development functionality is really useful to have installed in a > production image, so the distinction between development and production is > not as clear cut as you might think. > > For example, the debugger-based error handlers are necessary to debug a > problem that is showing up in a production even though they are part of a > package called Seaside-Development. > > Also, without the 'Seaside Control Panel' (which requires OB and started > this discussion)) it is more difficult to configure and control the various > adaptors that you will be using... unless you really know what you are > doing. So the 'Seaside Control Panel' is another one of those tools that > you'd want installed in a production image....unless you know what you are > doing > > So in the end, I think that 'Core'/'default' should stay the way it is, but > perhaps the remaining packages could be grouped in such a way that it is > easier to pick and choose functionality to be loaded with the 'Base' group > when you really know what you are doing ... Agreed, for what it's worth. Julian _______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
|
|
Where can I find the SPDF library? It seems to have disappeared from the Internet.
Thanks, -Carl Gundel Liberty BASIC for Windows - http://www.libertybasic.com Run BASIC, easy web programming - http://www.runbasic.com_______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
|
|
Public store?
Sent from my iPhone On 7 Jan 2011, at 18:56, "Carl Gundel" <[hidden email]> wrote: > Where can I find the SPDF library? It seems to have disappeared from the Internet. > > Thanks, > > -Carl Gundel > Liberty BASIC for Windows - http://www.libertybasic.com > Run BASIC, easy web programming - http://www.runbasic.com_______________________________________________ > seaside mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
|
|
In reply to this post by Carl Gundel
SqueakMap Package Loader under SPL PDF
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 1:56 PM, Carl Gundel <[hidden email]> wrote: Where can I find the SPDF library? It seems to have disappeared from the Internet. -- http://john-mckeon.us _______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
|
|
In reply to this post by EstebanLM
Hello Esteban,
I use this script to load Seaside 3.0.4 without tools I do not need. "install things we need" | pv goo required| (Installer monticello http: 'http://www.squeaksource.com/Seaside30') install: 'ConfigurationOfSeaside30-dkh.305'. pv:= (ConfigurationOfSeaside30 project version: '3.0.4'). required:= #('Seaside-Tests-Functional' 'JQuery-UI' 'JQuery-Tests-Core' 'Seaside-Adaptors-Comanche' 'JQuery-Tests-UI'). pv load: required. "install Goofy to remowe tools not needed" goo:= Goofy new. #('Metacello-Platform' 'Metacello-Core' 'Metacello-Base' 'Metacello-ToolBox' 'Metacello-MC' 'ConfigurationOfKomHttpServer' 'ConfigurationOfGofer' 'ConfigurationOfGrease' 'ConfigurationOfMetacello' 'ConfigurationOfSeaside30') do: [:p | goo package: p]. goo unload. WAKomEncoded startOn: 8080. --- On Wed, Jan 5, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi, > I want to install Seaside 3.0.3 into a production image, and I want to get rid of OmniBrowser... which groups should I specify to obtain this? _______________________________________________ seaside mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside |
«
Return to Seaside General
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |