<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, Dec 13, 2013 at 12:41 AM, Frank Shearar <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:frank.shearar@gmail.com" target="_blank">frank.shearar@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">On 12 Dec 2013, at 20:44, Chris Muller <<a href="mailto:ma.chris.m@gmail.com">ma.chris.m@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:22 PM, Frank Shearar <<a href="mailto:frank.shearar@gmail.com">frank.shearar@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>> On 12 December 2013 19:43, Chris Muller <<a href="mailto:asqueaker@gmail.com">asqueaker@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>> I like the Announcements route. SystemChangeNotifier is a dog.<br>
>>>> Compatibility with Pharo is in the long-term very important<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> Freedom from Pharo constraints is even more important.<br>
>>><br>
>>>> (but it has to be a two-way street, and not blind).<br>
>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> I don't believe Pharo will ever be interested in a two-way street of<br>
>>> compatibility with Squeak. If anything, the opposite. Neither group is<br>
>>> interested in feeling constrained by the other. The Pharo fork happened for<br>
>>> good reasons.<br>
>>><br>
>>> We should pursue our own wildest imaginations, not follow Pharo.<br>
>><br>
>> No arguments, but...<br>
>><br>
>>> We should<br>
>>> steal components of Pharo which offer the kind of functional leverage<br>
>>> ratio's appropriate for Squeak.<br>
>><br>
>> ... you can't do that without some kind of compatibility. Not without<br>
>> entirely rewriting stuff, which is kind've missing the point of<br>
>> stealing.<br>
><br>
> Not rewriting, porting. Which doesn't lose the value of stealing.<br>
<br>
</div></div>Ah but the epsilon between rewriting and porting tends to zero as the two systems diverge.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>+1</div></div>-- <br>best,<div>Eliot</div>
</div></div>