Josh Gargus <josh at schwa.ca> writes:

>
>
> The "community" doesn't want only one thing, and different people in it want
> different things to different degrees.  I don't dispute that what you have
> described above is desirable, in principle, to the vast majority of community
> members.  However, it is fundamentally at odds with other goals that various
> community members hold dear.  A balance must be struck.
You are right, but let's as it that way:
- how many of you do activly work in the "Kernel!"
- how many of you do use it for application development

I would be suprised to see a ratio much higher than 1:10 000 or even
1: 100 000 (kernel dev/application dev).

As I understand Keiths posting he's mainly an application developer and
so it's clear that he does not like to re-write his code over and over
again (for whatever good/bad technical reason). 

I just can tell you a story from Eiffel wonderland where this ratia
surely was much more in favour of "application" developers.  One
development team in Eiffel has broken old code with nearly every "minor"
update. This means software once written and "working" just stops. If
you ever have encountered that, you surely will understand Keiths points
very well. 

There's IMHO no better way to drive away people but to break their code
over and over again... 

>
> Here's a very specific example.  I would like to see more integrated support
> for concurrent programming in the Squeak kernel.  Toward that end,
> I've added a
> trivial implementation of "promises" to the trunk (hopefully, I'll take it
> further relatively soon... one of the things I've done in the interim was to
> re-read Mark Miller's dissertation).  
Well so you are interested in another thing. Well so you probably do not
see the points of Keiths mails. 


Regards
Friedrich


-- 
Q-Software Solutions GmbH; Sitz: Bruchsal; Registergericht: Mannheim 
Registriernummer: HRB232138; Geschaeftsfuehrer: Friedrich Dominicus