Hi Simon,
Thanks for pointing this out. I understand most distributed version control engines were all done in parallel, I'm still getting used to Mercurial so whenever I find a difference I need to write it down somewhere in order to remember.
I'm glad that you replied. I think my commit is incomplete, but I didn't know how to verify that. For some reason the Kernel project showed an asterisk in Monticello, so I guessed that I modified something in the Kernel project. It allowed me to check it in until the last moment when it said "you are not authorized". Following GitHub rules it could allow me fork the kernel project (clone) or allow me to send an email to the Kernel project developers with my change (as suggested in the Cathedral and the Bazaar). I don't know which would be best, but I guess "both" would be the best answer.
The comment that you mentioned that I wrote is about how do I know the history in Monticello? For example in Mercurial all the changes are local and then you merge the changes locally by pulling from the remote repository. While Mercurial is not ideal in the sense that having so much dependencies can get confusing, the advantage is that when the central repository goes down, you can easily setup a new repository using a 3 day old copy and ask all committers to point to the new central repository and reapply all their commits. It is so easy because Mercurial calculates on the fly what it needs to push.
Monticello on the other hand seems to allow to commit on a change by change basis to wherever I want: A local file, any remote repository, etc. And it is up to me to figure out (and remember) where I stored what. I would be really hard for me to remind any of that.
Since I was uploading 2 packages, what I would like is to have a package dependency manager like Maven. Does that already exist or I would need to recreate that from scratch?
Regarding how to verify the commit I did, I would expect that there would be a build machine. Since there seems to be no build machine, the process recommended in Pharo by Example is to download the code from Squeak Source into a clean image. Do I need to recreate the project in Monticello and then download the code?
Cheers, Guillermo.
On Mon, 2010-10-11 at 14:32 +0200, Simon Denier wrote:
Hi Guillermo
I saw your commit and especially your comment
"saving locally first, then remotelly, doesn't simply copy the changes like Mercurial does..."
The way it works with Monticello, compared to Git/Mercurial (remember that Monticello was conceived before/in parallel with such systems...)
- the save command in MC always creates a new version of your package in the repository you selected
- saving a version on a remote repository also saves a local copy
- if you want to save a version first locally, then want to copy it later to another repository, use the "copy" command from the MC browser
Alternatively, the Gofer API provides commands which are closes to Git/Mercurial workflows: push/fetch etc. See http://www.lukas-renggli.ch/blog/gofer
BTW, is the fix complete? Your package only provides a new method FamixReference>>identityInstanceVariables
-- Simon
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@iam.unibe.ch https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev