On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Philippe Marschall <kustos@gmx.net> wrote:
On 29.01.2012 17:29, Steve Wart wrote:
Big legacy projects are still using Envy for VisualWorks less for the
reasons listed below, but mostly because it's extremely difficult to
migrate to Store without doing a "big bang" and most of these projects
don't have 200+ developers anymore anyhow (disclaimer: I'm only familiar
with 2 or 3 of these "success stories"). Many of the big Smalltalk
projects were mostly done using Envy, and it's a powerful tool, in spite
of its limitations. If there was a reliable way to move the latest
changes from a set of Envy configuration maps into Store, it would make
it much easier to get away from ancient, buggy and unsupported SCMs
(like Envy/GemKit).

So in something like ten (10) years they haven't managed to migrate await form said SCMs

OOCL and JP Morgan are still using Envy (although I've heard that JPM has purchased a license from IBM and maintains an in-house fork with the latest version of VW). I believe UBS has migrated to Store, but their team is very small and tight-knit. It's been very hard for big distributed shops to migrate SCM from Envy to Store. I think that Cincom has provided consulting support for that but I don't think they've provided any stats on the cost or effort to migrate a typical project.

VA shops continue to use Envy as a supported and effective SCM but I haven't used VA commercially, but I'm assuming it works for them.

It's not surprising that this old stuff doesn't get migrated given how IT projects are funded in general. When you've got hundreds of Java servers spewing errors all day, it's hard to get excited about some old Smalltalk stuff that just keeps the business chugging along.

Cheers,
Steve