On 2010-01-21, at 5:12 PM, keith wrote:

>> 
> 
> You might think you are doing the community a service, but actually you haven't provided stuff or "captured knowledge" that the existing community can use easily. All you have done is encouraged some members of the community to abandon the rest of us, moving over to developing stuff for a new image that I cant use, leaving behind compatibility. My production images don't have closures, the customer asks for an update, I cant load the latest seaside if it uses closures for example. 

Keith I see Eliot's not responded, I think he's busy elsewhere. 

But your example here is completely off-base.  

The Squeak community resisted doing closures for *years*, and under their breath muttered no friggen closures in squeak, but that's so simple to do... 

Why: 

(a) It would break things and *force* people to migrate their code at *their expense*. 

 The VM architects were extremely aware that was just the way it was going to be. 

Eliot proposed a clean solution and pushed out the VM changes and changes sets against a older Squeak/Pharo image to exploit it. 
I build a VM off that so someone could at least run it. 

The Pharo community then took the VM, change sets and reviewed their code base for additional fixes, later the same happen with the Squeak trunk.
 
If there is stuff not converted then ask yourself is anyone supporting that code? 
If it's your stuff, then either you or others you convince will have to convert it. 

--
===========================================================================
John M. McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com>   Twitter:  squeaker68882
Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
===========================================================================




-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20100121/f438bc1c/attachment.htm