3

In Pharo 2.0 i started with Classes in one Package/Category (I'm not sure, what is the right term in Pharo at the moment). I have an identically named Monticello package which i contribute to.

Now i split the Package/Category:

  • MyPackage

becomes:

  • MyPackage-Core
  • MyPackage-AddOns

What is the intended way to manage these Packages/Categories with Monticello now? Is there a way to automatically split the Monticello packages accordingly? (I created some mess doing it manually and ended up starting in a new image and manually filing in the classes and then creating new Monticello packages)

Community
  • 1
  • 1
MartinW
  • 4,966
  • 2
  • 24
  • 60

2 Answers2

1

I found this on the pharo developers mailinglist (splitting MC packages):

Closing the eyes and restarting from scratch. We did that too with the Seaside packages at some point. [...]

We did the same for Moose. We kind of followed this process:

  1. create new sub-package XYZ-Sub*
  2. move classes from XYZ to XYZ-Sub*
  3. repeat until all classes and extensions from XYZ are moved away to subpackages
  4. add the Monticello repository to XYZ-Sub*
  5. commit all XYZ-Sub* packages. Make sure that there are no categories without packages left behind (in other words to not lose code)
  6. save the image
  7. load in a fresh image
  8. if problems appear, and they always appear because it is manual work, go to the previous image and recommit
MartinW
  • 4,966
  • 2
  • 24
  • 60
  • 1
    I typically finish this process by create a final empty commit for the MyPackage monticello package indicating that this package is now deprecated and listing the names of the new packages. – Damien Cassou Jun 21 '13 at 09:20
0

You might want to take a look at the Monticello manual, or perhaps it is easier to read the section on Monticello in Pharo by Example. Deeper info is in the draft chapters in volume 2

Stephan Eggermont
  • 15,847
  • 1
  • 38
  • 65
  • Thank you, I am familiar with the documentation. I just could not find anything regarding my problem. I thought it must be quite common? – MartinW Jun 10 '13 at 16:09