6 Jan
2015
6 Jan
'15
6:48 p.m.
Oops, sorry if may mail came over stronger than I meant it to be. (answers inline)
Sure, it’s just that I understood your mail to mean that I should load (for now) a
specific version to get things running.
I was not aware of that. Now I am. :-) So this is simply the case of updating the
configuration to point to the right version?
OK, I was just trying to find a solution and offering to share it. But if you guys fix the
bug in a different way one of these days I am very happy with that solution. :-)
---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <---
Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry
PLEIAD lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
On Jan 6, 2015, at 13:22, Tudor Girba
<tudor(a)tudorgirba.com> wrote:
On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 4:22 PM, Johan Fabry <jfabry(a)dcc.uchile.cl> wrote:
It’s not specific to this exact case, but I have had a fair share of versioning issues in
the past in Pharo.
Ah, versions incompatibility again :-(
I do not know what you mean by again. I’m not really
happy with having to load a specific version of X to be able to get the default version of
Y to work.
Please, let's not overreact. This is an issue encountered after we spent 1
day of porting a major application between two major versions of Pharo. Surely, we can
wait a little bit longer and solve the remaining problems. I have a
workaround right now which is to implement the missing message (doing nothing), so I guess
that’s OK for me for now.
A more fundamental problem, to me, is why is PetitParser loading Glamour? Is this for the
classes in the PetitGUI package?
Yes. You are free to load it without the GUI if you want.
It should be possible to re-implement them using
Spec and then there’d be one dependency less.
I do not see how this would be less. Glamour is already in the Pharo image.
I can have a
look at that somewhere this month if you guys would be willing to integrate the results.
I would not integrate and not maintain such a UI at this point in time.