[Pharo-users] Pharo + git workflow
kilon.alios at gmail.com
Tue Jan 26 10:49:13 EST 2016
Obviously it will better fit Pharo since its made to work with smalltalk
code, but that does not make it any less terrible. Just because you have
one implementation of something that does not mean its good. Its just means
its there and it works.
I dont know the internal, they are not documented anyway, there are some
class comments here and there but thats pretty much it. I dont even
remember when was the last time monticello got an updated, I mean a serious
update not just a couple of bug fixes the 2 years I have been around.
Secondly GUI is just plain awful, Smalltalk maybe be the first or one of
the first to implement guis, but those implementations never ended up to
something that would be approachable and easy to use on a day to day basis,
some tools suffer more from this some less, Monticello is up there with the
Thirdly the inability of the system to version control images , audio files
and other assets it defeats the central purpose of smalltalk of everything
being objects with a loud "Nope !" from Monticello "Only source code is".
So its awesome that Smalltalk , and Squeak got its own version control
system, that is easy to use and Pharo inherited it. Congratulations to
people behind it. But the GUI needs to go, its a bad advertisement to
Pharo, and we need something that is not stuck to dark ages as you
correctly pointed but for the opposite reason. Because any way you try to
turn Monticello you wont find a label written "modern" on it. The label you
may find on it is more like "abandonware".
Also there like a ton of OOP languages out there using git with no major
problems, the problem with smalltalk is that smalltalk is an island.
And the problem with islands is when you end having fun with them you feel
stuck since they dont provide an easy access to the outside world.
"Git just manages blobs, text files at best. Dead text"
Last time I checked Monticello used a format called mcz which is nothing
more than a zip file containing st files, which are as you call it "dead
text" files. Also I would like to remind you that git is used by the CUIS
smalltalk to version control their images, I thought images are live code.
Personally I dont see the diffirence between live and dead text. Its just
text to me. The VM is the one that makes it live anyway.
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 5:09 PM Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven at stfx.eu> wrote:
> > On 26 Jan 2016, at 15:59, Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.alios at gmail.com>
> > To be fair my experience with pharo and git have been not always smooth
> either. I have the VM crashing again and again completely randomly when it
> was trying to pull SmaCC as dependency for my project Ephestos, had to drop
> SmaCC and moving my python type parsing at python side.
> > But I find it ironic someone using Monticello, trying to equate git with
> dark ages, you cant get more dark ages than monticello, frankly. No offense
> to people who made it , its great that is in there but its full of problems
> and bad designs and cant even begin to be compared with Github and GIT GUI
> clients. Monticello is according to my personal opinion by far the worst
> tool of Pharo.
> No it is not. It is a version management system that understands our
> object and code model, a system that we control. Git just manages blobs,
> text files at best. Dead text.
> (This does not mean it is perfect, nor that it cannot improve, nor that we
> should not improve our git integration.)
> > On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 4:51 PM Thierry Goubier <
> thierry.goubier at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2016-01-26 15:11 GMT+01:00 Sean P. DeNigris <sean at clipperadams.com>:
> > NorbertHartl wrote
> > > - I need to use BaselineOf instead of ConfigurationOf. Thus you cannot
> > > Versionner anymore
> > Unfortunately. This is the biggest drag for me after switching all my
> > personal projects to git (GitHub for public and BitBucket for private). I
> > had gotten spoiled by Versionner and hand-editing MetaC artifacts feels
> > going back to the dark ages :/
> > Well, I guess copying the baselines generated by Versionner into a
> BaselineOf is probably a way to do it.
> > Thierry
> > -----
> > Cheers,
> > Sean
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pharo-users