Against wastefull forks (Re: Taking Ownership of Squeak (WAS Re: Python at Disney))

Andrew C. Greenberg werdna at mucow.com
Sat Mar 10 02:43:22 UTC 2001


At 2:32 PM -0600 3/9/01, Bob Hartwig wrote:
>I would normally agree with this, but I think Squeak is a special case.
>You can't effectively do blue-plane research without occasionally burning
>some disk-packs, and you can't effectively do robust 24x7
>industrial-strength apps when the platform keeps shifting and breaking
>under your feet.  Both approaches to development are valid, but difficult
>to reconcile.
>
>On the other hand, it could be argued that if you want to do
>industrial-strength Smalltalk in early 2001, you should use a different
>dialect.  Opinions?

Maybe so.  But the reason the SqC dist isn't all that 
industrial-strength friendly in some respects is simply this: there 
hasn't been any real interest in doing it.  Not that solid 
industrial-strenthening had been rejected.  Many of us have been 
working on other, more squeaky clean projects.  On the other hand, I 
have worked both paths, and found it satisfactory for what I did.

If Squeak doesn't do what you want.  Do it!  Propose it.  make it.

I still don't get it.  Make a concrete proposal, and maybe I can 
start to see what is troubling you about the present release that can 
be fixed "in the ordinary open c(S)ource."





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list