If python goes Etoys, let's go scripting then - with the best
IDE for creating and a clean license for running(!) scripts
Hilaire Fernandes
hilaire2006 at laposte.net
Wed Aug 23 09:09:35 UTC 2006
About script, is not what is about GNU Smalltalk, plus it have a clean
licence, a JIT compiler but yes a poor IDE environment
Hilaire
Le mercredi 23 août 2006 à 08:27 +0200, Markus Gaelli a écrit :
> Dear squeak masters and friends,
>
> Professor Nierstrasz (liking the IDE of Squeak and Smalltalk a lot,
> but starting to build Ruby scripts for convenience (#!) reasons)
> asked Marcus and me about the possibility of having Squeak as a good
> script writing engine on the one hand and a script executor on the
> other hand.
>
> The underlying idea is simple: use a full fledged Squeak as your IDE
> but then file out your smalltalk script you created (in a more human
> readable version, thus without those "!!" and also edible in Emacs
> and friends, maybe looking like the scripts Andreas and Bert proposed
> on Squeak-dev recently) and run it on top of some minimal working
> image in a #!/usr/local/bin/squeak way. Ruby on rails will be on the
> next version of OS-X, but what does us stop to have things like
> Seaside there in the follow up?
>
> I think currently it is the license. Especially for the stuff needed
> to run the "scripts".
> Whereas I would not care for the open source kindness of the Squeak
> license, many people do...
>
> As far as I understand the situation, a minimal working image could
> be soon made OSI-compliant using this apple open source license
> APSL2, no?
> Isn't it mainly morphs on the image side? These would not be
> necessary in the minimal script, but maybe I am too "blue eyed" here
> again.
>
> But for the VM side: Is it too naive from me to think that it is only a:
>
> "YES, I HEREBY DECLARE ALL MY CHANGES TO THE APSL2 LICENSED VM FROM
> SQUEAK 1.1 ALSO TO BE APSL2 LICENSED"
> (please sign here ...)
>
> from the few VM gurus (I hopefully caught here as addressees) which
> prevents us from doing so?
>
> So please, dear VM gurus, tell me, this would be possible to
> relicense your great work of the last years to something OSI
> compliant- and then do it, - or that this has already been done, or
> that it is unnecessary for some good reason. I think changing the
> _current_ VM license to APSL2 could accelerate the rest of the
> process a lot.
>
> Then - having this "scripting language plot" established, we might be
> able to tear some more people to the "Etoys Omniuser plot" which in
> my eyes stays the master plan of course...
>
> And: I may be ignorant! Is there any discussion about this issue I am
> missing, or points that I see in a wrong perspective?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Markus
>
> p.s. Please forgive receiving this as a doublet, but it was silly of
> me to send this only to a few people yesterday - learn sth. new every
> day... ;-)
> The alternative would have been to send it to squeak-board, but now I
> opted to have the discussion (hopefully there is more action) public
> and not closed - it is about the openness of squeak in the end...
>
>
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|