The future of SM...
goran.krampe at bluefish.se
goran.krampe at bluefish.se
Wed Jul 28 11:03:56 UTC 2004
Stephan Rudlof <sr at evolgo.de> wrote:
> Hi Göran,
> goran.krampe at bluefish.se wrote:
> > ...
> > And I can at this time, for anyone still reading, mention that I
> > yesterday executed two unit tests green that made the very first partial
> > dependency analysis. New class called SMDependencyEngine.
> This is nice for you. And for me, too, if deps are finally coming into SM.
> But this is also discouraging for my own coding: last night I've started
> with classes
> DepSVersion, DepSTransformation, DepSPerformer,
> but now I think it makes no sense to continue.
Well, I needed to start coding a bit to get my thoughts down into
something concrete, see below.
> My idea has been to just make a backend with a clearly separated
> interface to be used by SM and other tools, with the main target SM.
Similarly I have tried to keep my code separated like this:
1. The representation of configurations as I have described. They are
attachable resources to the releases. So this code is
modifications/additions to the SM base model. Both adding code to handle
generic resources as has been planned a long time, and also added
specific resource SMPackageReleaseConfiguration.
2. The dependency engine which is a separate class. This means different
engines/logic/algorithms should be easily written using the basic
information available in the map (mainly the releases with their
attached configurations and their compatibility level categories (the
thing you elected to reflect in the version numbers)).
> But if you have started to make your own thing, why should I continue?
Well, I have been "making my own thing" since 2002 in this area -
although I haven't written specific code until now. :)
> To compete with a part of software from you, where you decide to use
> yours or mine? I know, which I would use in such a situation...
This is of course an unfortunate scenario. Let us instead see if our
ideas can be merged and if we can collaborate - as I have wanted all
along. I would definitely *NOT* stomp all over the very first person
stepping up wanting to collaborate with me on this.
My coding so far has not been a "decided course" - but as I said - I
needed to get some code written to clear my own head and to be able to
> Don't understand me wrong: I can understand that you've just started
> without making yourself dependent from others.
The reason for starting was just because I got tired of thinking with a
pen and pencil.
> Possibly I've misinterpreted your call for help in this area.
No, you didn't. Let me prove that by replying to your DEPS article. And
I hope you can take my criticism - because there will be a bit of that,
and then we can borrow/build from there? :).
And then we can start sharing using Monticello when we have boiled this
down to a first shot.
You can reply to me in private or on the list - and or join #squeak on
irc.freenode.org where I am.
More information about the Squeak-dev