This is the discipline in Moose, and I want to keep it. Also, having multiple packages eases collaboration.
Well… A discipline that I would like to see in Moose is a traceability of all the versions. In my opinion, this has more benefits than moving the categories to packages.
So, what does not right now mean? I can also do it, if you want.
We generate the VisualWorks source code from the Pharo code. I need to make sure that the exporter we have will still work with multiple packages. This automatic export is a top priority of us.
I will do a benchmark for the loading time. We have a Metacello caching under the hood. I will see this point during next week.
Cheers, Alexandre
On 17 May 2012, at 22:10, Alexandre Bergel wrote:
I am absolutely for in principle. However there is no good way to manage many packages. Adding or removing a dependent package is just painful. It also significantly increase the loading time. So yes, we will split Roassal, but not right now :-)
Cheers, Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
On May 17, 2012, at 3:28 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi,
Moose was the first user of RPackage, and RPackage works best when we have one package per category.
Roassal does not comply to this requirement, but it should because I want Moose to continue to be a good RPackage citizen :).
Alex, could you take care of splitting it?
Cheers, Doru
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"The coherence of a trip is given by the clearness of the goal."
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
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Problem solving efficiency grows with the abstractness level of problem understanding."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev