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-systembrowser/

Thierry

��

Esteban