2015-02-26 13:41 GMT+01:00 Ben Coman <b...@openinworld.com>: > Just a random query (especially since I haven't played with BaselineOf and > I might misunderstand something)... > should #baseline: be moved out of the ConfigurationOf class so that we > consistently have a BaselineOf class in both cases: git & monticello. > > There is some elegance in having the same scheme, yes.
> > That is, the ConfigurationOfXxx.mcz package will contain two classes: > ConfigurationOfXxx and BaselineOfXxx. > Hum, I'm not sure it will work. I'm under the feeling that Metacello expects the baseline to be in a package of the same name (BaselineOf) and that it wouldn't work. Dale? Thierry > > cheers -ben > > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:05 PM, Martin Bähr < > mba...@email.archlab.tuwien.ac.at> wrote: > >> Excerpts from Thierry Goubier's message of 2015-02-25 15:43:39 +0100: >> > BaselineOf is the same as a #baseline: in a ConfigurationOf. It >> describes >> > dependencies, packages and groups for a project, without versions. On >> > loading, a BaselineOf will behave as a #development version in a >> > ConfigurationOf which is to load the latest versions of the packages >> listed >> > (and whatever dependencies listed). >> >> sounds to me like one should use branches for baseline (since they update) >> and tags for versions in configuration (since they stay on the same >> commit) >> >> > Repositories urls which support branches and tags are github:// and >> > bitbucket:// urls; which support branches (and not tags) are >> gitfiletree:// >> > urls. >> >> oh, any particular reason, or just work in progress? >> >> greetings, martin. >> >> -- >> eKita - the online platform for your entire academic >> life >> -- >> chief engineer >> eKita.co >> pike programmer pike.lysator.liu.se caudium.net >> societyserver.org >> secretary >> beijinglug.org >> mentor >> fossasia.org >> foresight developer foresightlinux.org >> realss.com >> unix sysadmin >> Martin Bähr working in china >> http://societyserver.org/mbaehr/ >> >> >
