On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 01:50:06PM +0200, Marcus Denker wrote:
>
> On Apr 15, 2012, at 1:44 PM, Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:
> >
> > And wish made experiments if this Foo.fuel could be loaded into different
> > fork as Squeak, Cuis having Fuel into.
>
> I would not waste time with that... we will improve Pharo constantly, and it will
> be very hard (if not impossible) to keep some kind of compatibility layer on a binary
> code level between Pharo, Squeak and Cuis.
>
> And what do you get out of it? Wouldn't it be better to use the time to improve one system
> and make sure that system has a future?

Fuel seems to be well written and organized. Even though I have only used
Fuel a little (for remote task execution with OSProcess), I was able to
easily understand the code when I loaded it in Squeak.

There is no reason that a well-written package cannot be maintained for
several flavors of the image. That is a sign of competent developers doing
good work :)