On 2012-12-20 12:25 PM, Benoit St-Jean wrote:
> How useful...  This is the kind of stuff that makes me wanna shout!
>
> <complaint>
>
> I just installed Squeak 4.3 to migrate some code I had on an older 
> Squeak 4.x image...
>
> Loaded some of the tools I use, like ScriptManager to realize... That 
> the newest versions are for Pharo! With references to stuff that 
> doesn't exist in Squeak.
>
> In other words, the more commits to existing project in Squeaksource 
> (or anywhere else where the code used to be "Squeak friendly" and/or 
> developed for Squeak in the first place) the Pharo people do, the less 
> and less those projects will work with Squeak!
>
> It's just as if Volkswagen would take over the manufacturing of parts 
> for Honda and would adapt all parts for THEIR engines...  If I have a 
> Honda, what can I do?  :(
>
> With Pharo moving away from Squeak (and most other Smalltalks in 
> fact), if we don't find a way to clearly split what is "Pharo 
> friendly" from what is "Squeak friendly" (I resisted using the word 
> "compatible"), where are we heading ???
>
> </complaint>
>
> P.S.  This is going to be a nightmare if we don't act before the Pharo 
> people have "adapted" tons of stuff to *their* environment...
> -----------------
> Benoit St-Jean
> Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean
> A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero.
> (Albert Einstein)
>
>
Yea, it's an interesting point. I hear you shouting, but who are you 
shouting to? You've found a problem, and somebody^(TM) is supposed to 
solve if for you. Is that correct? Who?

I'm on the Squeak Board and from my point of view, you're observation 
would be more compelling if you proposed a solution to what you've 
discovered. If you just say it's a problem and somebody^(TM) should fix 
it, I'm not that interested. Especially when you cannot even take the 
time to think of a few criteria of the problem that may be used to fix it.

Here's what I can tell you. Squeak infrastructure is not responsible for 
every project in existence. You're first solution would be to talk to 
the maintainers of that project. None of the maintainers of 
ScriptManager are Squeakers. Might that tell you something?

http://www.squeaksource.com/ScriptManager


The Squeak Board is in the process of looking at this issue, though. And 
I can say what is on the horizon. The first thing we will have is 
community supported packages tested regularly in images in the Squeak CI 
server. There will be a list of packages, a top twenty list, say, of 
packages that will be known to be the responsibility of the community.

Now, wouldn't it be good if there was something like SqueakMap, 
something separate from Squeaksource and SqueakSource3, that was a 
Squeak-only location for packages? They you'd know that you had come to 
the right "app store". We're working on that too. But I don't think it 
will be SqueakMap, which in my opinion has run its course. So were 
looking at this issue. But SqueakMap is a contentious issue. Very 
contentious. There are those who would like to put a stick of dynamite 
in it. And those who get extremely incensed at even the thought. 
(Actually, even the word, in public, like I just did. Counting down in 
... four...three ... two...oh, look!)

So, we're looking at that. And in the near future, say Squeak 4.5, there 
will be better guidelines around these problems.

You could load the same packages into the new Squeak4.3 that you loaded 
before. If you want the latest Squeak in addition to the latest versions 
of the packages, well, then I think you may need to do some work. And 
when the infrastructure I just described is in place, there will most 
certainly be packages that, all that new infrastructure notwithstanding, 
will be nobody's responsibility but yours and the actual package developer.

Chris
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20121220/def173ff/attachment.htm