> On 04 Feb 2015, at 09:46, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr> wrote: > > >> On 04 Feb 2015, at 09:33, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote: >> >> Hi Mike, >> >> I just tried your application and it works well. Simple but effective. >> > > One question: Could we benefit from that for daily review of Pharo fixes?
I don't know if it can compare slices (MCZ's with dependent/required packages). >> It is of course sometimes a bit hard to get to an actual URL ;-) >> >> Good work. >> >> Sven >> >>> On 04 Feb 2015, at 02:33, mikefilonov <mikefilo...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Where you tool takes its input? >>> >>> The tool requires a full URL to mcz package file for both base and target >>> versions. This allows to compare versions on different locations. I attached >>> the screenshot of the form : >>> >>> <http://forum.world.st/file/n4803522/Monticello_Seaside_Review.png> >>> >>> You may easily log in http://review.pharocloud.com/ as there is no >>> registration and stuff (I used Mozilla Persona) so you see the form like in >>> three clicks. >>> >>>> Ok I split this method into one in the superclass and one in the >>>> superclass. >>> >>> This is one of the reasons why my tool requires full URL for both base and >>> target - so it is not restricted only to ancestor comparing. With Monticello >>> Seaside Review you can compare v43 with v46, which could be the final >>> version of you change. >>> >>>> What I would love is to bind it with epicea. The users can comment the >>> >>> Sorry, but I did not quite get the idea. Could you please describe a use >>> case how Epicea is used in a development process? >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Mike >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> View this message in context: >>> http://forum.world.st/Monticello-review-web-application-tp4803443p4803522.html >>> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >>> >> >> > >
