Hi, I think that most browsers produced in Samlltalk look remarkably similar to the original one which was developed 30 years ago [1], even though it clearly isn't the best possible solution. I would like to get to one that does not necessarily resemble the current one, and in the process uncover new ways of developing software. This is a longer goal we have with GT, and I would like to get to something tangible in Pharo 5. [1] http://www.tudorgirba.com/presentations/dx Cheers, Doru On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 5:17 PM, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier@gmail.com> wrote:
2014-12-04 9:44 GMT+01:00 Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com>:
On 04 Dec 2014, at 09:24, Norbert Hartl <norbert@hartl.name> wrote:
We need a better-than-git Smalltalk thing :)
yeah, we need a lot of things. But who will put the bell on the cat's neck? just dreaming of what we *could* have will make us never have anything⦠is not that horizons are bad, they are needed to show the path to follow. But not to accept the small improvements in the name of some super-goal we are never close (because, of course, horizons move constantly) is prone to immobility.
Honestly, in that particular case, I really had the feeling for some time that Pharo had chosen the super-goal instead of the incremental improvement. It changed with the focus on libgit2, luckily :)
If I want to troll again :):) (beware)
I'm interested by the Nautilus vs OmniBrowser decision. I have an hypothesis that this decision has value for anything looking like a Moldable, Glamour-based, Browser . Because in my mind, the OB gui framework and Glamour are along the same lines, and the OB GUI framework was missing something which pushed Nautilus forward[1]. So, for those who have used OB and Nautilus, or are using Squeak (where OB is still in use) and Pharo, what do you think?
[1] http://marianopeck.wordpress.com/2012/02/26/nautilus-the-reborn-of-the-syste...
Thierry
Esteban
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"