I know, Pavel.

If you want to see Squeak shrink faster, and finally catch up with
your sterling work from ages ago, please take the image in
http://build.squeak.org/job/SqueakTrunk/573/artifact/*zip*/archive.zip
and see if I haven't broken anything. In particular, poke around the
Parser, because Nicolas and I saw some problems in the update stream a
while ago concerning Parser.

Because one of the most serious non-technical problems that Squeak has
is lack of people.

frank

On 29 October 2013 08:42, Pavel Krivanek <squeak1 at continentalbrno.cz> wrote:
> Hi Nicolas,
>
> for Squeak we were able to shrink the system to a small kernel and
> reload and initialize the Morphic back long ago. In 2006. Two years
> before Pharo started to exist. The reason why Pharo can do it now and
> Squeak not is not technical.
>
> Cheers,
> -- Pavel
>
> 2013/10/25 Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com>:
>> The problems you are going to face are:
>> 1) you need a good package delimitation, with clear contracts (on which
>> package/API do I depend?) both in the Squeak image (to save the package that
>> you want to see reloaded) and in Pharo
>> 2) the package delimitation has to be in good agreement, because the MC
>> tools do not deal with package refactoring
>> 3) since API are not in agreement, you gonna need plenty of glue for working
>> around changes like trimBoth, includesSubstring: etc...
>>
>> What are your goals exactly?
>>
>> A) you want to build on top of smaller kernel?
>> Then once you have 1), why should you go into Pharo rather than building on
>> top of your Squeak kernel?
>>
>> B) you want to profit by clean-ups and refactorings and shiny new
>> architecture made in Pharo?
>> Then yes, porting some interesting Squeak bits to Pharo has some value.
>> But that means you spend a lot of efforts for maintaining those bits alive.
>> That means switching from old file system to new one, switching from old
>> text system to (yet future) new one, switching to Spec, switching to
>> Settings, Announcements etc...
>>
>> C) You have no specific goals, just want to follow the momentum, but keep
>> your confortable Squeak slippers?
>> If you end up with hacks for loading all the old Squeak mud, then you'll end
>> up with Squeak, just a different Squeak, and unless you enjoy jumping many
>> hurdles, I don't see the point.
>>
>>
>> 2013/10/25 Edgar De Cleene <edgardec2005 at gmail.com>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> De: Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com>
>>> Responder a: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
>>> <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>>> Fecha: Fri, 25 Oct 2013 14:06:43 +0200
>>> Para: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
>>> <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>>> Asunto: Re: [squeak-dev] SqueakTrunk image on build.squeak.org broken?
>>>
>>> Yes, Pharo is doing a great work of simplification.
>>> On the other hand, it deliberately has zero requirements to make removed
>>> parts reloadable, so the task is a bit easier...
>>>
>>>
>>> Still exploring and understanding his system, but reporting
>>> ReferenceStream to Pharo 2.0 and having DependencyBrowser of Squeak working
>>> on it, a long time work could be put our view of Morphic on top of his
>>> kernel.
>>>
>>> Or Cuis Morph hierarchy.
>>>
>>> Edgar
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>