On 23 Mar 2015, at 17:49, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 7:19 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 2:33 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote: stepharo wrote
Could you stop crying because this is a bit boring?
Could you address my policy suggestion instead of crying? ;)
For two of the issues, the change in iteraction was an unwanted side effect. Both where retracted.
The third (sender of) happened the following: opening the browser on a single method was broken for a while, and it tool some effort to fix. While cursing this fact, I thought that this idea of opening a different tool with no way of knowing beforehand which one will open was never a good idea and that I always wanted to get rid of it.
So I changed this to be able to work (the other bug was fixed some weeks later, too), and was thinking that if people would really not be able to life with that they would tell... Yours is the first comment about it.
In general, the idea of "you have to ask and get the ok from the list for every change" is dangerous... the Smalltalk people are *extremely* conservative. If you ask, the only answer will be "NO". Smalltalk is perfect. There is nothing to improve. And even the bad things: people use the for decades. If we want change, it will be hard...
Such a prejudiced mischaracterisation! Marcus, listen to yourself. Please, look into your heart and rethink this.
Maybe it is a bit too strongly formulated, but certain discussions do tend to contain arguments that Marcus is referring too. I recall a discussion some days ago about #withIndexDo: vs #doWithIndex: where the provisory conclusion was 'we cannot change & we'll leave everything like it is' with arguments that referred to history, ANSI and cross-dialect compatibility. And there are many API discussions like that. It must have been a different world 30, 40 years ago when it must have been possible to actually design fundamental API's and have the ability to change it. Pharo exists because we want that back.
Keep in mind that you can find a reason to *not* do something for *anything*.
Marcus
-- Marcus Denker -- denker@acm.org http://www.marcusdenker.de
-- best, Eliot