My only objection was the documentation but since we cleared this up you have 100% my support , my faith and my trust.��

Frankly I have voiced several concerns with GTPlayground because there was things I was missing from workspace and you were prompt to fix those issues and fast and efficiently , I see no reason to doubt that your work will have a massive impact on pharo and will drive Pharo forward.��

Personally I love your style, because you are not just a coder its clear to me you have also an eye for good design. We may not agree at some decisions but still I cannot doubt that you take care of your design and understand the practical benefits of a good design.��

Concerning the name itself you can change it, we cant have progress without change and if the name has to go, the name has to go. Even if you did want to change the name just to credit youself my point is that you well deserve it, you worked hard for this, its your baby why the hell you should not name it whatever you want. I dont care about names I care about features, documentation and good designs. ��

On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 11:53 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Hi everyone,

My intention was to have a discussion based on arguments and to ask for permission to change something I believe in. If I give the impression that I want to name for the sake of naming, I am sorry. And I am sorry I had to disturb so many people with my infatuation.

At the same time, I am also quite abated by the fact that too many people look only at what exists and not invest trust in the commitment behind the effort.

I will stop responding to this thread now.

Thanks for the feedback.

Cheers,
Doru



On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 9:30 PM, Hern��n Morales Durand <hernan.morales@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello Doru,

I think you have a new different implementation of the classic Workspace, for better or worst.

The problem is everybody wants their tool be named as the highest taxonomic rank. Compare it with naming your cat as "Cat" and not as Siamese Felis Catus which is a specific breed.

On the other side, what prevents for anyone else doing a "better"/new implementation and reclaiming the Workspace name? And this could happen every year? I don't know you but I get bored of seeing "I want that name" discussions.

Workspace is a type of tool, it happens that there is an implementation which owned such name. It should be renamed as OldWorkspace, DeveloperWorkspace, ClassicWorkspace, or whatever.

For me, Workspace in the World menu should display a sub-menu with both implementations. And community gains a place to display/register more implementations discriminated by its type.

Hern��n






2014-12-08 3:18 GMT-03:00 Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com>:

Hi,

As you might see, the GTPlayground is called playground not workspace. The main reason for this is that workspace implies the place where work is done, and work is typically associated with creating code.

This is not the intention of the workspace.

Workspace also comes with a history that is associated with actual implementations. While the current GTPlayground might appear to be similar to the workspace, I think the way you can use the latter produces a significant shift.

Furthermore, I think the term playground is more inline with the idea of "playing with live objects". And, in the future, the implementation will likely evolve towards even more liveliness.

It is for this reason that I would prefer that the World menu item gets renamed to Playground.

What do you think?

Cheers,
Doru

--

"Every thing has its own flow"




--

"Every thing has its own flow"