I can understand. We wanted for long time a Grease version that does not dirty our moose packages.
Does that mean that: - if Moose does not load Grease, that Moose implements (a part of) Grease? no ;)
- if Moose loads Grease, that Moose overwrites (a part of) Grease? no :)
In either case, does it not make sense to use Grease and contribute the changes there, rather than fork a specific version of Grease?
Yes but for that there needs to have a place to publish changes And a maintained Configuration. In our case, the situation is much simpler. Pharo added trimBoth in String (because "THERE IS NO POINT TO KEEP COOL CODE OF CORE SYSTEM CLASSES IN EXTERNAL PACKAGES" - remember that this is the motto of Pharo - systematically get a better infrastructure) - I know that you know but other readers of this email may not be (yet) brainwashed :). So since the configuration (which is the tool to say for Pharo1.4 load version 123, for Pharo2.0 load version (without trimboth)â¦. was not updated we got redefinition in grease on String methods. With have the right tool to manage complexity we should just use them instead of a packages list and a gofer script. Stef