blake at kingdomrpg.com
Mon May 22 08:37:49 UTC 2006
On Fri, 19 May 2006 22:52:26 -0700, Peter Crowther <Peter at ozzard.org>
>> From: Torsten Sadowski
>> There is no package system from Apple.
>> Large chunks of software reside in app bundles and frameworks which is
>> very modular but on the other hand ineffective. If I want to publish
>> software based on something not in the base system I put
>> everything I need
>> in the app bundle. And someone else does the same...
> Yes. Microsoft have gone down the same route with .Net (and, in fact,
> with their application recommendations since the betas of Windows 2000 -
> about 8 years now). It's the only way they've found to prevent the "DLL
> Hell", or more generally dependency hell, that plagues modular systems.
> It also means that an app bundle is standalone, requiring nothing more
> than a base system and certainly not requiring access to a package
> repository. I don't know about you, but the incidence of applications
> that won't run because of incompatibilities has fallen markedly on the
> systems I manage since that time.
> I'm interested. Why is this 'ineffective'?
On a related note, I understand that a good deal of the delay in Vista
comes from precisely the problem of supporting various assemblies in
different versions. To the extent that they couldn't resolve it, had to
scrap muc of the .NET rewrites they were doing, and go back to the
"classic" style of development.
If true, that would certainly constitute "ineffective".
More information about the Squeak-dev