Revived from the dead [Re: [squeak-dev] [Cuis] Cuis]

Nicolas Cellier nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com
Sun Jan 24 14:14:46 UTC 2010


2010/1/24 keith <keith_hodges at yahoo.co.uk>:
> Progress which cant be used is not actually progress.
>
> From my point of view, every feature of 3.11 that you publish which is
> directly loadable into 3.10, I will accept as progress, because I can use it
> now.
> Otherwise, I will have to wait over a year to port my code base and find
> out.
> Presently it seems to me that every feature of 3.11, is a potential
> compatibility problem, making the port more difficult and the probability of
> the port happening more unlikely.
> I get paid for delivering an application that works. The porting process,
> when it eventually happens will end up as a month or so of unpaid work,
> since the client doesn't care about the details.
> What I don't get is how come Randal, who is an application developer
> himself, doesn't see this.
> Do you have some other solution? Ahhh I get it. Randal is building his stuff
> on other peoples packages like seaside, so you get to leave the hassle of
> fork incompatibilities to them, its "someone else's problem". Cool solution.
> So... the seaside crew announce that they are going to solve this problem by
> only developing for Pharo, and the Magma guy announces that he is going to
> solve this problem by only developing for Squeak. Pity the poor soul who
> wants to use Seaside with Magma
> that would be me
> Keith
> p.s. before someone who is incapable of abstract thought pipes up and says
> "but seaside runs on squeak as well", and "magma runs on pharo as well" The
> Magma-Seaside case is "only an example" demonstrating the principle of the
> problem.

There is at least one abstraction you've become a master of: circles ;).

> p.p.s now with the current state of play, I simply despair, since squeak
> ceases to be a viable platform to actually work in, because everyone is
> insisting on developing to moving targets, and I mean everyone! All you have
> to do to change this is conceptually develop patches only relative to
> specific non moving releases. Then all of the forks will naturally converge
> their API's, and you wont leave people behind.
>

Oh well, this applies to my 2cents bug patches (even these happen to
be different in 3.10, trunk and Pharo)
Bye bye closure, COG, etc...
A 5x speed up certainly is a moving target I will learn to love.

>
>



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list