Big Bang [Re: Proposal for Squeak 3.8 release schedule]

SmallSqueak smallsqueak at rogers.com
Sun Oct 31 04:56:30 UTC 2004


Re: Big Bang [Re: Proposal for Squeak 3.8 release schedule]Marcus Denker wrote:

> Am 14.10.2004 um 07:58 schrieb Andreas Raab:

>> Hi Goran,
>>
>> Let me try to answer your questions:
>>
>>> 1. Is Tweak meant to replace Morphic alltogether in the long run? Or
>>> is
>>> it only replacing parts of Morphic?
>>
>> It is clearly intended to be a replacement of Morphic. Replacing
>> "parts" makes little or no sense as it would break too many things
>> that need fixing. However, we realize and acknowledge the fact that
>> Morphic will stick around for a long time (similar to MVC which is
>> still in Squeak) and the only thing we am working on is the ability to
>> get rid of both MVC and Morphic if that is desirable (which it will
>> for packaging purposes but not for a long time as most of the tools
>> are available for Morphic).

> The tools are in Morphic now, but porting them to Tweak is quite simple.


    Is there any other reason not to drop both Morphic and MVC now ?

>> I think the best way to describe the *current* relation between
>> Squeak, Croquet and Tweak is to say: Squeak is being used by both.
>> Both systems have a set of requirements which are met by Squeak -
>> mostly that of having a fairly simple late-bound object system with
>> good programming tools and -most importantly- the ability to change
>> everything top-to-bottom. I fully expect to port both forward to the
>> next Squeak release which contains m17n (again "using" Squeak) but
>> whether that's going to stay that way is a different question.
>>

> I'm quite sure that if there would be a TeaTime enabled tweak based
> system (using that new VM stuff), I would use it for all my work.
> As would most other people, I guess. For me, Squeak was and is about
> moving forward. Not implementing the past.

> So at that point, there would just be no "next release" of Squeak in
> the sense of today's Squeak, as everybody would be contributing to the
> new system.
> (Of course, this is just playing with words: For me, "Squeak" never
> meant the hack based on St80 we have now, but a vision for a new system
> of the future).

> One thing (and that is really important): It would be good to have some
> idea of how and when this transitions will happen. Will it be a hard
> switch or a gradual transition? If we all know that we will use "the new
> thing" it would be nice to be able to put work into that at some point 
> instead of something that later does not get used. (e.g. the harvesting 
> I do is mostly completly not relevant for me personally. If I would put 
> as much work into another release as I did in 3.7 and 3.8, and later nobody 
> uses it, that would not be fun. 

> Of course, just stopping "because there will be something
> better in the future" is not the right thing, either. Not doing the
> trivial improvement because a better one might come in the future is a
> great way of making sure that nothing happens at all.

    Somehow, I lost the respond from the Croqueteers on the issues 
    that Marcus raised.

    Cheers,

    PhiHo.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20041031/eafaa690/attachment.htm


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list