[Pharo-dev] Which tests should be run in CI?

Chris Cunningham cunningham.cb at gmail.com
Thu Dec 12 13:21:33 EST 2013

If it is a compatibility layer, then now that Pharo has it's own #package,
shouldn't the Pharo version of Grease just not include it anymore?  Once
the various Smalltalks start to implement what it is claiming it wants, the
compatibility layer for that dialect should change, I would think.  So,
Seaside should still use #packages, but on Pharo, it gets the native
#packages results.

This assumes that what Grease wants out of package is what Pharo provides -
and it is possible that Grease will need different compatibility artifacts
to make the Pharo results match what Grease expects.

I would think from a Grease perspective, the ideal world is to have nothing
left in Grease at all because all of the dialects have implemented
everything they want, in at least the minimal way they wanted.  As a step
towards that, having one dialect removing the need for Grease would also be
a big, happy step forward.


On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Stephan Eggermont <stephan at stack.nl> wrote:

> Doru wrote:
> >This is clearly an issue of Grease. And it is not essential either as
> there are no senders to it.
> There are senders in Seaside. They look not so difficult to change.
> >So, I see no reason not to rename it in Grease.
> It is a compatibility layer, so you wouldn't be able to know looking only
> from Pharo.
> Stephan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org/attachments/20131212/a5f8ddf7/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list