[Pharo-project] renggli mirror created on smalltalkhub

Dale Henrichs dhenrich at vmware.com
Thu Jul 5 09:44:14 EDT 2012


Dennis,

Understood... You asked a very good question!

If using git meant that we would have to go backwards to text-based development I wouldn't be so enthused. 

In the past I was "on the record" as being very skeptical of being able to use git for Smalltalk development, but back in January when I saw HOW Otto Behrens had mapped the Monticello package structure to disk, I saw that it could work very well for Smalltalk development.

Dale

----- Original Message -----
| From: "Dennis Schetinin" <chaetal at gmail.com>
| To: Pharo-project at lists.gforge.inria.fr
| Sent: Wednesday, July 4, 2012 9:03:01 PM
| Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] renggli mirror created on smalltalkhub
| 
| 
| Dale,
| 
| 
| Thank you for all (this and other) explanations you provided on the
| topic.
| 
| 
| When the topic is to provide another backend for storing Smalltalk
| code, it's absolutely ok and all the advantages are understood.
| 
| 
| But when some people say something like "source code is text and
| nothing more" (at least that's what I hear, though I can be
| mistaking) and we shouldn't reinvent the wheel… and I see it in
| context of "Smalltalk is so unpopular"… and the logic is something
| like: we should popularize it — hence we should use (preferably,
| only) git for source-code control — and we should abandon images
| because most developers do not like them, etc, etc. Well, it's a bit
| scaring, because when I try to extrapolate and understand where it
| is leading us, I wonder where's Smalltalk there? Do we need it at
| all?! :)
| 
| 
| Once again, I just feel this tendency in our society, and it's very
| likely I'm misunderstanding and absolutely wrong. I'll be glad to
| know I am, so I just wanted to clarify.
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| Best regards,
| Dennis Schetinin
| Sent with Sparrow
| 
| 
| 
| On Wednesday, 4 July 2012 г. at 20:30, Dale Henrichs wrote:
| 
| 
| 
| 
| 
| Dennis,
| 
| 
| If you look at the Cypress format[1] (used by FileTree), it is the
| Monticello package structure "serialized to disk". Reading the
| Cypress format from disk is no different than materializing the
| Monticello package structure from an .mcz file. So any program that
| an reason about the definitions from an .mcz file can reason about
| the definitions from the Cypress format.
| 
| 
| Cypress format may look like text, but to me I see Smalltalk
| objects:)
| 
| 
| Dale
| 
| 
| [1]
| https://github.com/CampSmalltalk/Cypress/blob/master/img/CypressStructure-STIC2012.png
| ----- Original Message -----
| | From: "Dennis Schetinin" < chaetal at gmail.com >
| | To: Pharo-project at lists.gforge.inria.fr
| | Sent: Wednesday, July 4, 2012 6:29:40 AM
| | Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] renggli mirror created on smalltalkhub
| | 
| | 
| | On Wednesday, 4 July 2012 г. at 16:11, Damien Cassou wrote:
| | 
| | 
| | 
| | 
| | On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Dennis Schetinin <
| | chaetal at gmail.com
| | > wrote:
| | 
| | 
| | 
| | Am I wrong considering migration to Git-or-AnythingElseTextOriented
| | to be a
| | give up on hopes for a real object-oriented source
| | control/management
| | as it
| | could and should be in Smalltalk?
| | 
| | 
| | can you think of any feature we could have now we couldn't with
| | Git?
| | I didn't say "now", I talked about "hopes". E.g. hopes for "Source"
| | Control Tool being aware of refactorings and other *operations* I
| | apply to my program, instead of treating it as a plain text with
| | some changes of unknown nature. I'm not sure it's possible right
| | now
| | (I know it's not, better to say?). But with a Smalltalk-based
| | source
| | control we can have it on one splendid day in the future. And I
| | think on the Git way we'll finish with just some advanced
| | text-comparison algorithms. No?
| | 
| | 
| | 
| | Best regards,
| | Dennis Schetinin
| | Sent with Sparrow
| 
| 




More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list