Hi Colin,

Yeah, your idea makes sense, somehow...  But adding a layer, when it's clear that Pharo is deconstructing the "Squeak base" (its ancestor) piece by piece will make it hard.  At the rate at which they are deleting "squeak stuff" in the Pharo image, we'll all spend our time coding for this "compatibility/portability" layer.  Besides, can you imagine the mess that will result for projects that are cross dialect and that are already providing compatibility layers (Glorp, Seaside, etc) ???  Two layers of compatibility, really ???

To paraphrase Fleetwood Mac, "you can go your own way" I'd tell the Pharo people.  I find it funny that Squeak's child (Pharo) is farther away from Squeak than VisualWorks can be these days...


 
-----------------
Benoit St-Jean
Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean
A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero.
(Albert Einstein)


>________________________________
> From: Colin Putney <colin at wiresong.com>
>To: Benoit St-Jean <bstjean at yahoo.com>; The general-purpose Squeak developers list <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org> 
>Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 2:29:33 PM
>Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] Squeaksource, Squeak and Pharo..
> 
>
>
>
>
>On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Benoit St-Jean <bstjean at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>In other words, we should setup our *own* SQUEAK ONLY repository
>
>Now there's an idea. Sort of like a ports tree.
>
>
>Colin
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20121220/eea5a354/attachment.htm