2009/2/13 Adrian Lienhard <adi at netstyle.ch>:
>
> On Feb 13, 2009, at 18:06 , Keith Hodges wrote:
>
>>
>>> Somehow I got amiable through Keiths Mail to the pharo list. He was
>>> blaming the pharo crew for not caring about squeak and things/fixes
>>> others do. That was exactly the reason back then for me to fix it in
>>> pharo and then open a bug on mantis as well. So it turns out that the
>>> integrational aspect doesn't work in either direction.
>>>
>> It would work fine if....
>>
>> SqueakMap was treated as an external package to both squeak and pharo,
>> and the repo, or at least a repo is available to any contributors that
>> want to improve things.
>
> [...]
>
>> If in the case of SqueakMap situation mentioned you "fixed it in pharo"
>> then that means there is likely to be a new SMBase with your initials on
>> it, where is it? If it is languishing in a pharo repository, then that
>> simply illustrates my point. Namely, that pharo should conceptually
>> treat external packages as external packages, and contributors should be
>> encouraged to improve such external packages for everyone. e.g. tell the
>> maintainer what is going on, and check your changes back in to the main
>> development stream... isn't it rude not to?
>
> For version 1.0 we've planned to remove SqueakMap from the Pharo core and
> treat it as an external package.
>
>> My complaint against pharo is that while the rest of the squeak
>> community has been trying to modularize the image and treat more and
>> more modules as external loadable packages. The pharo team goes back 3
>> (?) years and ignores anything done in said external projects in the
>
> As a side note, Keith, I'm slightly getting annoyed being criticized over
> again for what we do wrong in your opinion. To do it our own way without
> conflicting with the Squeak way of doing (or not doing) things, is why we
> left. I believe that we can profit from the common effort, but it should
> happen in a constructive way.
>
> Adrian
>
>

Keith, i understand your rightfull indignation.
But i personally feel, that people who making fixes to external
packages having no intent on keeping them private.
It comes simply from different development process they involved in,
and our common laziness to do something in addition (like ANN the fix)
to what possibly be done to fix some annoying issue.

I seen multiple 'twas already fixed in XYZ' in this mailing list. And
XYZ is not always =='Pharo' :)
I think that such message could serve as a signal for
backporting/reintegration but not as a signal to bash people :)


-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.