Part of that is that I started the project "tweet something about Pharo every day". some 15 months? ago... my idea was that we need to make public what happens because most people's perception was : Smalltak is dead.
If people want I can stop.
YES PLEASE STOP THIS WAS THE MOST RIDICULOUS EVER IDEA. IMAGINE people could think that we are not dead...
Not time to stabilize nothing.
Pharo 1.4 is frozen. We just fix bugs. The same with 1.3. Or even 1.2...
Is needed such acceleration? ... My point is, I'm trying to move a business with Smalltalk and the acceleration of Pharo is well know by me (from other companies) and sooner or later, impact in my job and I'm a very LITTLE software house can't migrate my products all the time."
You should *not* migrate. That's the idea. Just as one uses a (in the future unchanging Cuis, I am sorry to hear that), you can use an unchaning Pharo 1.4, or 1.3. Only when your project needs it, (because you actively with manpower develop it for a longer time), you can move to a new version.
We simply have to accept that some developers can have this feelings and try to find a way how to limit it. I think that some official Pharo blog (maybe written by Esteban) would be very helpful. Some kind of not very extensive technical information source that will help people to stay in touch with Pharo progress. That will explain what is being changed in Pharo and why. I think that developers than will see the changes like positive not as alien ones.
What I think is problematic: Peopler are against Change. But when somone nevertheless does it, build a great system, the same people that did not allow us to move will gladly abandon the old system for the new system. Cuis is a good example. According to the Philosophy of German, it should not exist.
Maybe we should partition the *mailinglist* by stable and unstable? This way people using the stable don't see the noise and can focusâ¦
Yes let us create a core-dev private mailing-list.
Marcus
-- Marcus Denker -- http://marcusdenker.de