[squeak-dev] Re: [Smalltalk for small projects only?
steve at wart.ca
Sun Jan 29 19:47:34 UTC 2012
First let me apologize for using such a horrible IT euphemism. I have been
hanging around software politicians for far too long. I think you deserve
all the credit for coming up with an elegant and effective configuration
management system that has brought many parts of the Smalltalk community
together to build common, useful and practical tools.
Regarding your race suggestion, I think you are right that having more
choices will be good for the community. I can't claim that I don't have
resources available - I can come up with a few hours a week to work on
this. I'll start with the links Frank posted, but I think the two
approaches in the end may share some common features.
I've been thinking about this idea for a long time but without feedback I
haven't had the courage to start. Maybe I can finally help.
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Dale Henrichs <dhenrich at vmware.com> wrote:
> I have two comments:
> 1. "inventing the future" doesn't happen by considering
> how "ambitious" it may seem. In the end it is probably
> easier than you think and harder than I think. If it was
> real easy, I'd have been done by now:)
> 2. I propose a race:
> You start working on your git backend for Smalltalk and
> I'll continue working on Metacello, first one to "git work
> flow" wins ... But then the real winners will be the Smalltalk
> I have said this before: "I can hardly wait until someone
> invents the replacement for Metacello---it will give me
> more time for other projects:)"
> ----- Original Message -----
> | From: "Steve Wart" <steve at wart.ca>
> | The idea of building the git workflow on top of metacello strikes me
> | as being somewhat ambitious.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Squeak-dev