On 24 Nov 2013, at 21:18, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
No you should not. 30 is really usable and we are in alpha. Now removing the old code browser is a goal but we should not fool ourselves. Once all the tools are based on Spec, breaking/changing spec will let us without back door.
I donât consider that a problem, on the contrary: eating your own dog food is good. BTW, in the past (old tools, old frameworks) the problem was the same. Yes, that means increased responsibility, so what ? If I break Zinc, nobody can load or commit code any more - though.
Stef
This makes think of the tick tock model of Intel improvements.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/silicon-innovations/intel-tick-tock-m...
Looks like with 2.0 and 3.0 we are going to have two "tick"s in a row. That may be too much.
I am afraid even trying out 3.0 when reading about all the moving parts that are changing in all corners.
Phil
--- Philippe Back Dramatic Performance Improvements Mob: +32(0) 478 650 140 | Fax: +32 (0) 70 408 027 Mail:phil@highoctane.be | Web: http://philippeback.eu Blog: http://philippeback.be | Twitter: @philippeback Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/philippeback/videos
High Octane SPRL rue cour Boisacq 101 | 1301 Bierges | Belgium
Pharo Consortium Member - http://consortium.pharo.org/ Featured on the Software Process and Measurement Cast - http://spamcast.libsyn.com Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and Ability Engineering EADocX Value Added Reseller
On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 9:02 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote: Hi guys
It would be good not to clean without a clear vision. For example we cannot register an old browser to browse code via the menu of a window. Now let us think two minutes to see if you can get my point:
- I want to unload nautilus, rb, keymapping, athens, Ecompletion, Gofer, NativeBoost, Zinc, â¦.. and reload them via their configuration so that we can manage Pharo with configurations.
- Right now we LOST yes LOST the configurations of most of the part of the systems (I just spendt several afternoon on the one of RB in the past and now guess what) because we do not have a process to use them and we are afraid to have 10 packages and 10 classes more in the system. I do not understand why we do not start to put the configuration inside the image. To me this is totally stupid not to do it.
- Now without a browser this is nearly impossible to work. So we will remove the old browser but we should go slowly because else I will you do it with emacs outside the image to see if you succeed.
So it would be good to focus on real impacting changes.
Stef