I would like island to stay also. To me, they are one of the most interesting additions to our base over the recent years. (We use them in Archipelago [*]...)
Best, Robert
[*] http://www.hpi.uni-potsdam.de/swa/publications/media/SecklerHirschfeld_2014_...
On 20 Nov 2015, at 21:54, Nicolas Cellier nicolas.cellier.aka.nice@gmail.com wrote:
Concerning Traits I would keep them in trunk for these reasons:
- if the package is not in trunk it will rapidly rot
- this package can extend cross compatibility with Pharo a bit further
I don't know which package really use them though, but that's my feeling
2015-11-20 20:18 GMT+01:00 karl ramberg karlramberg@gmail.com:
On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 7:40 PM, tim Rowledge tim@rowledge.org wrote: Should we keep Traits? It was a neat idea that I was happy to support but it got left unfinished. Where are tools to develop & manage Traits? Where is the usage?
Unless there is a compelling reason - and subsequent effort to fill out support - I suggest we should remove them. Along with Islands. And Universes. And probably Environments too, since that has stalled without becoming a proper part of the system.
Yes, it's very hard to maintain half implemented stuff, that lacks documentation and direction. And if people really cared about any of these I guess they would be used somehow. And improved over the years. Very little has happened with either of these.
If these subsystems are just cruft left over and nobody uses them, it would be good to move them out of trunk.
Best, Karl
tim
tim Rowledge; tim@rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim Strange OpCodes: IG: Insert Garbage
-- Robert Hirschfeld hirschfeld@acm.org www.hirschfeld.org