Squeak VM, real-time I/O, and threading

Craig Latta Craig.Latta at NetJam.ORG
Tue Jan 29 19:06:00 UTC 2002


Hi Goran--

	('Sorry for the narrow quote width... I'm on a handheld and haven't implemented automatic quote-filling yet:)

> What about license then? Heard 
> some rumour before that Flow is 
> under LGPL?

	(John Sarkela had asked me last year how I wanted to licence Flow, and I answered LGPL.)

> I downloaded the latest zip but 
> found no license at a cursory look.

	'Sorry about that... I didn't specify licensing details because I hadn't decided (and I was comfortable with the default legal standing in the interim).

> If I remember the latest "license 
> threads" correctly we (the 
> community) pretty much agreed
> that stuff that counts as "base 
> image" (when modules arrive; I 
> guess some modules will be 
> officially dubbed as "base" 
> modules) should be released under 
> SqueakL (at least).

	Currently, I lean toward licensing Flow under the recipient's choice of the Squeak license, LGPL, or a license I plan to write that more accurately expresses my desires (I have no qualms about adding yet another license to the universe :). So I assume Flow will enter Squeak under the Squeak license.

> I like Flow a lot even if I have a few 
> itches about it (only nitpicks but 
> anyway, as the author you 
> probably want any feedback you 
> can get):

	Yes, thanks!

> 1. I personally don't like the added 
> methods in Boolean like 
> #yourselfUnlessFalseDoFirst: . I 
> had to stare and check and think 
> and almost still didn't get it! ;-) My 
> advice: Get rid of those. :-)

	Hmm, they seemed straightforward and useful to me at the time. :)  I'll take another look...

> The Client/Server classes built for 
> reuse by inheritance would be 
> easier to use, I think, if 
> constructed for reuse by 
> composition.

	I think that's probably true... I tend to defer such specialization until the complexity gets to a certain point, and I felt I hadn't reached that point with the client/server modeling yet.

> And just to make things clear, the 
> reasons I abandoned Flow was that 
> it ISN'T in the base image and thus 
> currently suffers from that.

	Right... Although I'm interested in making Flow convenient to use for everyone, I'm encouraged by the potential for a distributed module system to make inclusion in a particular snapshot less of an issue. I think modularity will also hepl 

   >(incompatibilities with stuff in the base image, not enough use, not
   >updated to the latest image, not standard etc etc)
   >
   >regards, Göran
   >PS. <CSOTD>"One per day will have to be enough, hmmm, I need to fix my
   >Celeste hack to just bug me "per day"...</CSOTD> DS
   >
   >
   >
   >




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list