Hi Stéphane.

I enjoyed reading your thoughts in this matter. ^__^ Let's see how we can provide and maintain those layers and switches. Maybe they don't have to be "rather wide" at all.

Best,
Marcel
Am 30.05.2020 10:30:16 schrieb Stéphane Rollandin <lecteur at zogotounga.net>:
> I still prefer having an opened platform to being lock in own autistic
> world, but sometimes i wonder until which limit it is really worth...

This remark has a wide and deep reach and applies pretty much to any
life situation, individual or collective. In short, where is the limit
between 'self' and 'the rest of the world'?

Since there is no definite answer to this question then maybe, following
the traditional Smalltalk way, should we reify it and construct the
proper objects and protocols able to deal with its different specific
aspects- have classes reflecting the 'external world' so to say.

In other words, the implementation details of the external systems do
not have to enter the image, but there could be a (rather wide) layer of
abstraction within the image that tells the rest of the system what is
outside and how we are interfaced to it, with switches to allow, for a
given situation, either to retract in our autistic world (where backward
compatibility and resilience are ensured) or open up to a specific API,
(where the risk of obsolescence and deprecation exist, but are then made
explicit and dealable with).

Just hand-waving here...

Stef

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20200530/07e9605f/attachment.html>