[squeak-dev] Re: Meeting Report for 8/18/2010

Pavel Krivanek squeak1 at continentalbrno.cz
Tue Aug 24 07:45:58 UTC 2010


2010/8/23 Levente Uzonyi <leves at elte.hu>:
> On Mon, 23 Aug 2010, Pavel Krivanek wrote:
>
>> Hi Andreas,
>>
>> the latest KernelImage based on Squeak 3.10 is here:
>> http://comtalk.cz/public/pub/KernelImage/current/
>> I continuously compared the image to Squeak and commented the changes.
>> For more information see http://www.squeaksource.com/KernelImage.html.
>>
>> The approach to PharoKernel is a little bit different. There is not a
>> current image that can be downloaded. Pharo is almost prepared for
>> this remodularization, it only needs to finish integration of this
>> issue:
>> http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=2635
>> For the description of its scope of the Kernel, the following issue is
>> important:
>> http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=2105
>>
>> The goal of the KernelImage/PharoKernel is to have a modular system
>> with well defined packages a dependencies, not only the smallest
>> system. That was the reason why I always tried to keep the binding to
>> mainstream Squeak content.
>>
>> There are several possible approaches:
>> - take the original KernelImage and adopt it for the latest Squeak. It
>> should be quite easy.
>> - do the similar remodularization and patches as the Pharo did. The
>> package structure of Pharo and Squeak then will be very similar.
>> - Pharo did a lot of important work on the cleanup of the system, it
>> has wider and motivated community of developers and its goals are
>
> Oh, really?

Sorry, I didn't want to be ugly. Maybe not, I only wanted to tell that
from my point of view the speed of Pharo development seems to be more
progressive.

>> subset of goals of Squeak. What about to use whole Pharo as the basic
>> system for Squeak and let Pharo people to finish its modularization
>> and focus on tasks important for Squeak? Give me week or two and I
>> will show you that it's possible to load EToys and other Squeak
>> specific stuff to Pharo...
>
> Do you mean that the current Squeak trunk should be thrown away and Squeak
> should be based on Pharo?
> Levente
>
>
>>
>> To Edgar: sorry, I do not have Skype.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> -- Pavel
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Pavel,
>>>
>>> Thanks for your offer! I've been talking to Juan about an approach that
>>> might give us at least a feel about the size of the effort we're talking
>>> about, namely to use the Cuis image and cluster all classes and methods
>>> into
>>> three categories:
>>> * Unchanged. Those classes and methods exist both in current Squeak trunk
>>> and Cuis.
>>> * Squeak-Only. Those classes and methods do only exist in Squeak.
>>> * Modified. Those classes and methods are different between Cuis and
>>> Squeak.
>>> The idea here is to get a feel for the size of the effort before it gets
>>> into the details (i.e., it would help us to understand whether the
>>> modified
>>> portions are 1% or 10% of the total size). Do you think the approach
>>> would
>>> be equally applicable to your Kernel images?
>>>
>>> Speaking of which, I'm not entirely sure what the scope or direction for
>>> these images is. Can you say a little bit about whether there's some
>>> underlying theme to this work (i.e., do you have actual use cases for
>>> these
>>> kernel images) or is it mostly just an attempt to make things smaller?
>>>
>>> Lastly, where can I find one of those kernel images these days? I'm
>>> interested in seeing how different or similar the structure is, in
>>> particular compared to Cuis.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>  - Andreas
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/22/2010 1:05 AM, Pavel Krivanek wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 5:34 AM, Andreas Raab<andreas.raab at gmx.de>
>>>>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 8/20/2010 7:30 AM, Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 8/20/10 9:04 AM, "Juan Vuletich"<juan at jvuletich.org>    wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Andreas and Juan would like to find a way to leverage the work done
>>>>>>> to
>>>>>>> reduce Cuis for Squeak. Ideally, Squeak would become a smaller
>>>>>>> kernel,
>>>>>>> about the size of Cui
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You have a kernel and this is the Pharo Kernel, mostly Pavel work.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure what exactly you're talking about, can you elaborate? Is
>>>>> there
>>>>> an image to look at and learn from? So far, I found Cuis to be the best
>>>>> alternative.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Why smart people like both you desire do all again ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Mostly because doing something like that requires help from the people
>>>>> who
>>>>> have done it before. I haven't seen a post from Pavel in two years; to
>>>>> me
>>>>> that is a clear expression of disinterest. Contrary to which Juan isn't
>>>>> only
>>>>> present, but he's also ran and be elected to the Squeak board and has
>>>>> repeatedly expressed his willingness to help. All other things being
>>>>> equal,
>>>>> that seems like a vast advantage, wouldn't you agree?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Andreas,
>>>>
>>>> I'm ready to help you.
>>>>
>>>> -- Pavel
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list