[Cuis-dev] Converting Tonel packages

Dale Henrichs dale.henrichs at gemtalksystems.com
Wed Jul 31 11:50:39 PDT 2019

I've been following this particular issue and would prefer not to get 
into an email-based discussion of why tonel/filetree came to be and 
their relative disadvantages and advantages ...

However, I will be at ESUG in Cologne and would love to have a 
discussion (at a whiteboard) with one or more members of the Cuis 
community to talk things over and see if there is any common ground to 
be found ...


On 7/31/19 10:18 AM, Phil B via Cuis-dev wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 31, 2019 at 9:54 AM Juan Vuletich via Cuis-dev 
> <cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st <mailto:cuis-dev at lists.cuis.st>> wrote:
>     pufff.
>     I don't want to even think of how github package diff would look like.
>     At least they could use xxx.filetree.st <http://xxx.filetree.st>
>     and xxx.tonel.st <http://xxx.tonel.st> (like we use
>     xxx.pck.st <http://xxx.pck.st> and xxx.cs.st <http://xxx.cs.st>).
>     Now it is impossible for tools to tell
>     whether they are dealing wiht filetree, tonel, or some other
>     smalltalk
>     format...
> They use .properties files to convey that information. Actually I 
> think the entire point of these 'exploded' package formats was to make 
> raw method-level diffs pretty... at the cost of making the overall 
> package format quite ugly/cumbersome.   Every time I've had to look at 
> a repo using those formats, I'm happy you went the direction you did 
> with package files.  You prioritized the people using the package 
> files, they continue to prioritize the tools that manipulate them.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cuis.st/mailman/archives/cuis-dev/attachments/20190731/c3d4b3b2/attachment.htm>

More information about the Cuis-dev mailing list