Running Magma across different Squeak versions

[goran at krampe.se]

"Chris Muller" <ma.chris.m at gmail.com> wrote:
> Magma has enjoyed its wonderful compatibility and ease of migration
> thanks to staying mostly above the meta-layer.  But you can see that
> by introducing these to the protocol in this way, we have already
> broken compatibility with 3.7 and 3.8, which do not include
> MethodProperties.

Ehm, did you just say that Magma doesn't work with 3.8?

Gjallar has been focused on 3.8 since we use quite a whole big bunch of
libraries and 3.8 felt like the most stable and spread platform. I
haven't investigated jumping ahead to 3.9, it may be doable.

[SNIP]
> If you are still with me, thank you.  The point of all this is I would
> like to know how others feel about:
> 
>  1) 3.7 compatibiltiiy at all

Not interesting for us/me. At this point in time I feel that 3.8 is the
oldest still important platform. But that is just me.

>  2) mixing 3.8 and >3.8 images

Doesn't sound that useful - and definitely not for Gjallar.

>  3) the desire to use Blocks, CompiledMethods or Processes in your persistent model

Blocks could be useful - but currently we don't. I have a hard time
seeing the others being used - CompiledMethod could be interesting if
Magma was to be used for storing precompiled code in some SCM solution
or such.

>  4) the risks of adding all those honkin' classes above to the
> protocol just to support executeInServer:.

Well, we need those darn numbers. :) Or rather - we need the illusion of
a very large OrderedCollection that can be added to from multiple
sessions. Of course interested in hearing about alternatives. 

> Thanks..

regards, Göran