On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 7:10 PM, Yuriy Tymchuk yuriy.tymchuk@me.com wrote:
On 22 Jun 2015, at 17:45, stephan stephan@stack.nl wrote:
On 22-06-15 16:49, Yuriy Tymchuk wrote:
The point is that I can take my 2 year old Ruby project, load gems and
it works. When I take my 2 month old Pharo project that depends on Roassal (this is not only about Roassal, I just have a concrete case) - it breaks.
Pharo itself is not yet managed with configurations, and has AFAIK a
much higher change rate
than Ruby. I have been a lot less lucky with older Ruby stuff, combining
stuff from different eras
was interesting…
I am not saying about combining. I want to make my code usable. So when I make something I can say: "Ok, I have a stable version that works on Pharo 4 and depend on Roassal 1.11”. And if someone will want to run it in 2 years, he will download Pharo 4 and run it with Roassal 1.11. Off course it will not work when combined with something that depends on roassal 2.x, but al least it will work alone + other people will know that it’s supposed to work on Roassal 1.11.
FWIW I always keep a copy of my package-cache around after a full release build. Got bitten more than once with what you experience.
Now, I am doing lots of R at the moment and package dependencies aren't a walk in the park either.
Phil
Uko
That makes it essential not to depend on the numbered versions, as you
know that they will
need to be patched to keep working on a moving target.
Stephan
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
--