Hi vitor I'm sorry but I do not understand your question? can you rephrase it and give an example?
Stef On Sat, Dec 30, 2017 at 10:03 PM, Vitor Medina Cruz <vitormc...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello Stephane > > What if I want to define two projects for the same baseline: both pointing > to different groups? > > > <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail> > Livre > de vírus. www.avg.com > <http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>. > <#m_-7133589263725951599_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> > > On Fri, Dec 22, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.s...@gmail.com > > wrote: > >> From a baseline you can refer to a none github configuration >> >> here is an example from the pillar newpipeline dev branch it shows you >> both: dependencies on github projects and smalltalkhub >> >> >> baseline: spec >> <baseline> >> spec >> for: #common >> do: [ spec blessing: #baseline. >> spec repository: 'http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pier/Pillar/main/'. >> spec >> baseline: 'OSSubprocess' >> with: [ spec >> repository: 'github://marianopeck/OSSubprocess:v0.2.5/repository' ]; >> >> baseline: 'Mustache' >> with: [ spec repository: 'github://noha/mustache:v1.0/repository' >> ]; >> >> project: 'Cocoon' >> with: [ spec >> className: #ConfigurationOfCocoon; >> versionString: #stable; >> repository: 'http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/PharoExtras/Cocoon/main' ]; >> >> project: 'JSON' >> with: [ spec >> className: #ConfigurationOfJSON; >> versionString: #stable; >> repository: >> 'http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/PharoExtras/JSON/main/' ]; >> >> >> project: 'LightPhaser' >> with: [ spec >> className: #ConfigurationOfLightPhaser; >> versionString: '1.0.2'; >> repository: 'http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Pier/LightPhaser/main/' ]; >> project: 'PetitParser' >> with: [ spec >> className: #ConfigurationOfPetitParser; >> versionString: #stable; >> loads: #('Tests'); >> repository: 'http://www.smalltalkhub.com/mc/Moose/PetitParser/main' ]; >> project: 'PetitParserTest' >> with: [ spec >> className: #ConfigurationOfPetitParser; >> versionString: #stable; >> loads: #('Tests'); >> repository: 'http://www.smalltalkhub.com/mc/Moose/PetitParser/main' ]. >> spec >> package: 'Pillar-Cli' with: [ spec requires: #('Pillar-ExporterCore') ]; >> package: 'Pillar-Cli-PillarVersion' with: [ spec requires: >> #('Pillar-Cli') ]; >> package: #'Pillar-ExporterAsciiDoc' >> >> >> >> On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Vitor Medina Cruz <vitormc...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> This is mostly true, but ATM you may want to wrap your BaselineOf in a >> >> ConfigurationOf (i.e. refer to A with a SHA from B) for tool >> integration >> >> e.g. only Configs show up in the catalog. IIUC, one additional >> constraint >> >> to >> >> be aware of (not sure how important it is in practice) is that in the >> past >> >> with mcz repos, one could refer to a specific version of each package, >> but >> >> now you would only be able to specify a version for the whole git repo. >> > >> > >> > I was about to ask that after reading through Metacello docs — While I >> find >> > usefull to define groups and dependencies at package level (I need only >> > package A from ThatProject on version 2.6, cool!), I didn't understand >> why >> > define version at package level.... If many dependencies exists to >> different >> > versions of different packages belonged to the same project, doesn't >> that >> > means (or is an indicative) that those packages should be separeted in >> > different projects? I don't think this constraint will be a problem. >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Dec 21, 2017 at 12:37 PM, Sean P. DeNigris < >> s...@clipperadams.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> CyrilFerlicot wrote >> >> >> Now I got lost >> >> >> >> A ConfigurationOfXyz was doing two things: >> >> 1) Declaring the project structure of packages and their dependencies >> in a >> >> #baselineXyz: method >> >> 2) Tagging specific sets of package versions with meaning symbolic to >> the >> >> project e.g. 1.2 or stable or whatever >> >> >> >> >> >> CyrilFerlicot wrote >> >> > So, you just need Metacello to manage the dependencies... This is >> what >> >> > BaselineOf do. You just manage the dependencies part and >> >> > not the versionning part that is already managed by git. >> >> >> >> A BaselineOfXyz is very similar to what configurations did for #1, >> with a >> >> few simplifications (e.g. you don't need to declare the method a >> >> "baseline" >> >> or specify a repo because you obviously already know the repo because >> >> that's >> >> where you just got the baseline itself) >> >> >> >> >> >> CyrilFerlicot wrote >> >> > The equivalent of a ConfigurationOf version in now the SHA of a >> commit >> >> > or >> >> > a tag/release >> >> > of git). >> >> >> >> This is mostly true, but ATM you may want to wrap your BaselineOf in a >> >> ConfigurationOf (i.e. refer to A with a SHA from B) for tool >> integration >> >> e.g. only Configs show up in the catalog. IIUC, one additional >> constraint >> >> to >> >> be aware of (not sure how important it is in practice) is that in the >> past >> >> with mcz repos, one could refer to a specific version of each package, >> but >> >> now you would only be able to specify a version for the whole git repo. >> >> >> >> HTH >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- >> >> Cheers, >> >> Sean >> >> -- >> >> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html >> >> >> > >> >> >
