[Moose-dev] Re: About Metacello and the Moose process

So I saved my changes in a new version which I called: dev131: spec <version: '1.3.1' imports: #('1.3')> spec for: #common do: [ spec author: 'simondenier'. spec timestamp: '12/3/2009 18:01'. spec blessing: #development. spec package: 'CAnalyzer' with: 'CAnalyzer-simondenier.166'; package: 'XML-Parser' with: 'XML-Parser-Alexandre_Bergel.19'; package: 'Pastell' with: 'Pastell-Alexandre_Bergel.17'; package: 'Filesystem' with: 'Filesystem-cwp.51'.]. As you can, it is blessed as development with a micro number (1.3.1) So we can have three levels of release with Metacello: - baseline for the architecture - version for major and minor release, which can be stable, beta, or the main trunk of development - dev for micro release for developers, which we can see as branches, and which serves as history of development as Stef wishes

I called it dev, but maybe branch is a better name. Also a different blessing could be used, I dont know. Any idea? Note that Metacello handles well the numbering of version at major, minor, or micro level. Now about the process itself: - *update the configuration* so that you get other micro releases and you dont override one by accident :) - spawn new version from the minor or micro release you want to derive - save packages

- you are prompted to update package methods, which means update your new version method with the package info - then you are prompted to save the configuration It means that actually you need to do two commits: one for the packages, one for the configuration. Maybe we could improve the process and making the whole thing works seamlessly (save new version: spawn new version (prompt for version) -> save packages (prompt for comment) -> update version -> save configuration (reuse earlier comment).

-- Simon _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev