Tweak v. Morphic was: Re: [Q] Speed comparison 2.8 vs 3.8
jhouchin at cableone.net
Sat Aug 27 03:02:28 UTC 2005
Martin Wirblat wrote:
> Hi Juan,
> many people seem to think Tweak is the new Etoys. Why? All I can see
> indicates that it is the new Morphic. So, putting my question again in
> other words ;)
I agree with this. From what I see, Tweak is a new GUI upon which etoys,
et al will be built. In the "Tweak Introduction" pdf it explicitly
states that Tweak is intended to replace the Morphic UI in the future.
Tweak started back in 2001 when it became obvious that the eToy
architecture in Squeak had hit the wall in terms of what the Morphic
infrastructure could provide. Here is the original memo that started it all.
> Why is Tweak not "morphic" ? I mean if there is a specific quality
> Morphic has that Tweak hasn't, perhaps it would be useful to make the
> Tweak team aware of it in time.
So it seems to me that Tweak learns from Morphic, builds and improves,
not limits. So I agree. What does Morphic have that Tweak doesn't/won't?
> Other than that your effort is of course important for the many existing
> Squeak programs, that want to be used without consuming porting energies.
I agree that what the Morphic splitters is doing is a valuable service
to many. It also may help any transition to Tweak by the Tweak people. I
don't know. It would seem that a smaller set of items requiring porting
to Tweak for a minimal image would be an advantage. I don't know.
However, I have nothing invested in learning Morphic. As such I look
forward to Tweak and learning it for future projects.
Not trying to bring up any debate, but Tweak will also have a cleaner
license heritage. It is under the MIT license and should have no
obligation to any roaring mouse. :) (aka Disney)
Just my 2 centavos. :)
More information about the Squeak-dev