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