About squeak image compatibility (3.6/7/8)
Andreas Raab
andreas.raab at gmx.de
Mon Jan 9 06:27:15 UTC 2006
Peter Crowther wrote:
> As for Cees' rant on backwards compatibility and "4.0", who cares?
> It's broken now with traits; let's throw the remaining rotting
> subsystems out of 3.9 before it's released and start with
> something smaller.
In many ways I agree and I only wish we wouldn't make the same mistake
over and over and over. Right now we're in the midst of the process of
creating the "orphans of tomorrow" by throwing packages after packages
after packages into "basic" where those very packages lived a happy live
as *loadable* entities before.
Does anyone out there has the same feeling that I get when things get
added to basic? That they essentially get cast in amber, almost
impossible to change and *definitely* impossible to remove "because it
breaks X"? In many ways it's crazy to see the discussions about removing
orphans while at the same time nobody even notices the orphans that we
are creating (and could easily avoid) today.
Cheers,
- Andreas
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|