[Pharo-dev] Roadmap on tools?
phil at highoctane.be
phil at highoctane.be
Tue Aug 26 04:56:04 EDT 2014
Due to Ben leaving, we have one MIT version and his version.
Now, we will have the Pharo fork and his version.
Maybe is it time to fork the repo and get our own under the Pharo project.
On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Luc Fabresse <luc.fabresse at gmail.com>
> Hi all,
> Since the code of Spec has been integrated in Pharo when it was MIT, I
> think that this is not a problem.
> To me, the new licence only apply to the new code in the repository of
> Spec since the licence changed.
> So now, no spec code should be loaded in the Pharo base image.
> 2014-08-26 10:18 GMT+02:00 Serge Stinckwich <serge.stinckwich at gmail.com>:
>> On Tue, Aug 26, 2014 at 10:10 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker at inria.fr>
>> > On 26 Aug 2014, at 10:03, Serge Stinckwich <serge.stinckwich at gmail.com>
>> >> On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 11:17 PM, Alain Rastoul <alr.dev at free.fr>
>> >>> +1 for the GTInspector, and the Moose tools/paradigm too (Roassal,
>> >>> Moose and others), all that stuff is great step forward and could
>> >>> interest from doubtful people.
>> >>> I remember myself failing to show some collegues at work how the
>> >>> system could be a cool tool to play with, even for people sticking on
>> >>> dotNet, Delphi or C++.
>> >>> And sometimes they remember that too ...
>> >>> (Smalltalk? Squeak? -at that time- that blinking and poping toy ?
>> >>> ...)
>> >>> :(
>> >>> Still working on that like a flea (?- a morpion)
>> >>> Morphic removed is good news - clumsy, buggy and weird - but I don't
>> >>> understand the relationship with GTInspector ?
>> >>> I googled about that and just found a post of you about Bloc in the
>> >>> list, it sounds like a good idea, and I'm sure you'll manage to do it
>> >>> cleanly, but I'm also very curious about that: big bang or dependency
>> >>> injection and small steps? other patterns, techniques ? a link on
>> Bloc ?
>> >>> I'm also curious about Spec and it's status after it's change to GPL
>> ? Will
>> >>> it be supported in the future ? What are the alternatives ?
>> >> Yes, apparently spec is distributed now under a dual licence : MIT
>> >> when used as an external library (not sure what it means when you use
>> >> Smalltalk)
>> >> and GPL when integrated in an IDE ... I think that this is a potential
>> >> problem for Pharo.
>> > GPL is not compatible with Pharo. All code that is part of the Pharo
>> main distribution
>> > is either historical (Apple Licence) or MIT.
>> > We even let people sign a document that makes this clear.
>> > New code has to be MIT, we do not accept any other license (as part of
>> the main distribution).
>> > e.g. Zinc was done because the HTTP server we were using was made GPL
>> (it did not have
>> > a licence when we started to use it).
>> I completely agree with you. This why I was worried with this double
>> licencing of spec.
>> Serge Stinckwich
>> UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC)
>> Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pharo-dev