On 04/07/2015 03:50 PM, Peter Uhnák
wrote:
Peter this is a good point and why in a post on the pharo list, I
mention tools.... In tODE I have a `clone` menu item on my project
browser that will clone a github repository to the local disk and
then changed the Metacello locks and package repositoryGroups to
point at the newly cloned repository ... so tools ARE important and
perhaps the tools support in Pharo hasn't quite reached the point
where git/github can go "prime time"
I think that going to a disk-based SCM for Moose will solve some
problems: namely the problem with the shifting sands of the #stable
versions ... at least with local clones of the various projects it
is possible to achieve a completely stable load environment (no
matter how many repos are involved) because things will only change
when you are ready to change and even then you can merge in only the
work that you want to pick up ...
With a disk-based scm, it could be practical to consolidate some
projects or even host a number of separate repositories in a single
git repository that is always versioned together .. this type of
thing might make sense for the wholly owned Moose projects ... with
separate directories folks can load bits a pieces but the local
clone that they will ensure that allof the pieces are guaranteed to
work together .... there are a number of possiblities here ...
but still tools support is a critical item ...
Dale