Bert Freudenberg a écrit :

> Right. Because nobody from the Squeak community took on that task,  yet, 
> so there's nobody you could have "helped". Also, there was no  
> "decision" yet that Tweak actually should replace Morphic. There are  
> many cool features in Tweak, I personally like its ideas a lot, but  
> there are also people who dislike it for various reasons. The first  
> step would be that more people from the community actually try to do  
> something serious in Tweak. Only then could you estimate if it is  

People will not do serious things with Tweak as long as they do not have 
a middle term visibility about Tweak. Like it or not, this is how it 
work. An expression of interest from the Tweak developper to get Tweak 
mainstream in Squeak could of course change that. But it seems, as I 
learn it recently from other email of the thread, that it is not the case.


> actually worth-while to switch to Tweak as the default UI.
> 
> Also, mind you, it took Morphic quite some time until it became the  
> default UI. Several people worked full-time on it. That's also a  reason 
> why the "Tweak developers" don't take on such a task lightly.

It is understandable as resource is now tight. However it is not an 
excuse to not communicate, which seems to be the problem now.

Tweak is developped with Squeak for Squeak, its integration mainstream 
in Squeak can only be done in collaboration with the Tweak developper.
Steph suggested me a few days ago, to play with Tweak as a base for 
further development. I look at the tutorial, it was nice, I love many of 
the developer features comming with Tweak. Tweak introduced new paradigm 
as the annotation. This new features are changes to the core Squeak, 
IMHO to integrate thus core modifcation in Squeak a close collaboration 
is needed between the Tweak developer and the Squeak integrator. Without 
communication between both it is even not a good idea to try to do so, 
remember resources is tight for every one.


> Lighten up you french guys, you're gonna win the soccer world cup,  
> right? ;-)
> 
> Seriously, if someone came up with the idea to switch to Qt (just to  
> name some UI), would you expect the Qt developers to lead that effort?

Hum, I may say your are mixing two different problems.

One is integrating a framework written in Squeak into Squeak, were 
collaboration is needed between the framework and Squeak developers.

The second one is writting a Qt binding for Squeak, which is indeed 
abolutely not the problem of the Qt developers.

In the first one, you have to integrate in Squeak additionnal Squeak 
code, which  can cause trouble. For example the framework did some 
needed modification in the core Squeak, and thus modification may need 
to be adjusted both in the framework and the core Squeak. In that case 
communication and collaboration between the Squeak and framework 
developpers is mandatory.

In the second case, writting a Qt binding. It is unlikely, no it is 
impossible, you will need to change the Qt library to get working 
binding. More likely collaboration with the VM developper will be needed.

See you in Berlin ;-)

Hilaire