Camillo the stackVM can be important as a fallback So we can have Pharo and PharoS (as slow and stack) On Feb 5, 2013, at 4:34 PM, Camillo Bruni wrote:
On 2013-02-05, at 16:24, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
1) CI builds names is not the same than app names.
I am talking about the artifact names if that wasn't clear.
2) The "official" pharo vm (the NB Cog JIT), should be named just "Pharo", because that is what users will see in his dock bar. 3) The stack VM is not a debug vm is just a VM who uses a stack-to-register approach. I would call it PharoS or something that simple.
think about the user perspective? why would I even bother taking this VM? There is one that is fast, and another one that is what? less stable?
4) RizelVM is not a regularly distributed VM, so it should not be in pharo, but in pharo-contribution yes, definitely.
5) PLEASE, STOP MARKING ISSUES THAT CAN WAIT AS 2.0!!!! We are just 2 weeks of release. Stop adding new tasks. No matter if you think is important. Unless it will block us to release, IT IS NOT.
I associated this with Pharo2.0 ... I guess wrongly..
I provide fixes that can be included NOW => I have to mark them 2.0 otherwise nobody will ever ever look at it. => did you ever touch the monkey? You didn't, so unless that is fixed and it checks 3.0 tags as well, I can't help myself but putting it on 2.0