[RANT] Come on people! ;)
lecteur at zogotounga.net
Tue Dec 21 10:48:33 UTC 2004
Doug Way wrote:
> Anyway, um, I think Goran's main point was along the lines that you
> can't simply try to convince other Squeakers (or the Guides) to start
> working primarily on gearing Squeak toward the biggest group possible.
but this was not my point. my concern is: what are the stable parts of
Squeak which I can securely build on ?
examples of recent questions arising about parts of Squeak I'm using
(and relying) on:
BookMorphs - someone wanted to deprecate them for project (?)
Morphic - will it be replace by Tweak ?
Connectors - v1.9 don't load easily anymore and v2 is a complete
rewrite which does not seem stable yet ?
Regexp - will the plugin version be maintained ?
etc. (there are others !).
I'm developing a rather ambitious open source application for musical
composition and I would like it to live a long life. it's very nice to
see all this dynamic of experimentation taking place, but at the same
time some strong and solid ground should be maintained to allow for the
construction and long term maintenance of reliable applications on top
Squeak is a wonderful experimental field, but it would be much better as
a multimedia development framework if the experimentations and new
features did respect some generally agreed "shape" which I believe is
still to be precisely defined and accepted.
hoping that this makes sense,
More information about the Squeak-dev