I know we've already discussed it a lot in the past, but since none of
the reasoning for using Environments to solve this issue has changed,
the simpler approaches still deserve advocacy.  (Below..)

>>> My Environments use case, for which I have gone through all of this,
>>> is that I need to use and work on a Pharo package that uses the
>>> FileSystem library. The FileSystem classes have different names in
>>> Pharo, compared to the FS package available on SqueakSource.
>>
>>
>> Can you walk us through this use case? What tools do you use in which order?
>
> Well, if I were to start from scratch with my changes already in the
> image, I would do the following:
>
> 1. prepare the environment in a workspace, because there are no tools for it:
   ... snip...
>
> 2. open a Workspace that "lives" in the new environment:
>
   ...snip...
>
> 3. in the Monticello Browser, add a working copy for the package I
> want to work on (+ Package)
> 4. right-click on it > change environment... choose my new environment
> named NewProjectWithPharoBindings.
>
> 5. add the appropriate repository, open it, load the package -or- use
> Metacello to do it (you have to know the relevant package names and
> prepare them with steps 3 and 4) -but- I have not checked if Metacello
> goes through the MCWorkingCopy, so this might not work yet. In that
> case, wrap "env beCurrentDuring: [...]" around the Metacello load.
> This might be the easier way after all...
>
> 6. in the workspace created in step 2, send #browse to a class loaded
> in step 5, to open a browser in the new environment
>
> 7. if appropriate and desired, import some or all of the new classes
> back into Smalltalk globals. This also simplifies opening browsers,
> because you can do it via the search box.
>
>    Smalltalk globals from: env import: { ... }.
>
> Then I do whatever I intend to do with that package. Probably port the
> code when selectors have changed as well, not only the class names.

That's a LOT of stuff!  Environments provides a "trade-off" for the
developer to engage in one sort of work instead of another sort of
work.  A sort of work unfamiliar to Smalltalkers..

> This is (ideally) no different from developing without environments.
>
> I did not commit the TestRunner yet... like for Workspace, I added an
> environment instvar there. Will do that later today.
>
>>
>>> A remaining issue is that FSPath was renamed Path, which conflicts with
>>> ST80's Path class.

Given the broad meaning for the word "path", that was a very
ill-advised rename.  FilesystemPath is a much more correct and
appropriate for Smalltalk.

Equally, our own "Path" is so ambiguous, it's just wrong.  Sitting up
there as an abstract superclass -- we should rename it.

>> Our environments support renaming, doesn't that help?
>>
>
> Yes, it does. What I meant is that because of this name conflict, I
> require another environment at all. Unless I consider it desirable to
> rename one of the Path classes and possibly change all the references
> from Path to FSPath in the loaded package. Or rename Path to St80Path
> and hope that nobody will ever add another method uses it under the
> name "Path".

If someone added a new method, your app still wouldn't be calling it
unless you change it to do so..

> It is not possible to load a version of FileSystem where
> FSPath is called Path into the same environment as ST80 without
> overwriting ST80's Path.

Unless you renamed it.  I think of Berts question in the context of
system configuration.  Applications have code which configures the
image for themself.  Codifying the rename there (pre-load) means you
can still always use the latest-and-greatest versions without having
to do any more work than setting up Environments.

Name collisions are such a very-rare problem, and we're make the
system more complicated in *so* many places, it really does feel like
the tail wagging the dog.
_____
Environments is for developers (nerds). Although my preference is to
reduce and simplify the system (by removing it altogether), I will
respect developers who want to push forward as long as it is not
exclusionary to power users and Smalltalk newbies, meaning it must
preserve the illusion of Smalltalk-80's original, simple, single
Smalltalk environment.

Best,
  Chris