Tweak mainstream in Squeak
ducasse at iam.unibe.ch
Tue Jul 11 12:26:03 UTC 2006
On 11 juil. 06, at 09:27, Andreas Raab wrote:
> Hi Stef -
> I'm actually way beyond where I want to discuss these issues. I've
> been trying to leave that stuff behind but when a message like Lex'
> comes in where it basically says that it's my fault that Tweak
> doesn't work in 3.9 (as if it were by my choice) it just annoys me
> to no end.
true I did not read that :)
> The question I was raising, however, was and is serious: What, if
> any, is the plan for the metaclass kernel? Are there, for example,
> any plans for major traits refactoring? If so, it'd be nice if a
> little bit of a strategy could be layed out so that, for example, I
> can plan accordingly.
Right now we do not have plans. But I would be really interested
What adrian tried is to avoid duplication. I do not believe that this
is the best design and
I would really favor a rewrite of the kernel from scratch but this is
not high priority. I think that the metaclass kernel
is stable and I would like to get back one of your test green.
More information about the Squeak-dev