Re: Fwd: Packages in both the image and SqueakMap ofPackageInfo))

Marcus Denker wrote:

>On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 01:13:44AM -0400, Doug Way wrote:
>  
>
>>FYI, if no one objects, I will update the SM packages that are in the 
>>image, by adding the latest versions to the update stream.  Only the 
>>SMPackageLoader and PackageInfo have newer versions on SM, so these are 
>>the only two that will get updated.  The version on SM is still the 
>>"master", as described below.  (Seems relatively safe, since there 
>>haven't been big changes to either of these and they've been publicly 
>>available for awhile.)  This will be the last update of this sort for 
>>3.6.
>>    
>>
>There's that bug that you need to create the "sm" directory
>by hand. (if not, walkback). This needs to be fixed soon.
>I think Ned posted a fix...
>  
>

I see Ned has posted a few SM (and SMLoader) related fixes.  These are 
tricky... we probably don't want to have these fixed in the image but 
not fixed in the corresponding package on SM.  The package on SM should 
always be the "master" copy, with the image updated occasionally from 
that, otherwise things will get pretty confusing.

Daniel may have already incorporated the SMLoader-related fixes into his 
latest versions, I haven't kept track.  But there is no recent version 
of SM 1.0x, so we know that any recent SM fixes (such as Ned's 
create-the-"sm"-directory fix) are not in any recent version.

If these fixes are important enough for 3.6, perhaps Goran could put out 
a simple SqueakMap 1.07 which includes them. (or maybe it would be 
SqueakMapBase)  Or if he's extra-busy with SM 1.1 or other things right 
now, someone else with the SM password could do it...

- Doug