Keith,
How
can you state that the Pharo team did not ask to build a new version of
Squeak? Stef was in charge of a release and was left throwing his hands up
in frustration at the obstruction and inaction of the Squeak
community. Fortunately, he channeled that frustration in a positive
way.
Ideas
such as we see taking shape in Pharo were openly ridiculed on the Squeak
mailing lists - look there for any progress differential that you cannot
explain.
Bill
On 16 Dec 2009, at 08:15, GeertClaes wrote:
I don't know the entire background and I most definitively don't want
to
start something here but it looks like politics. The "Pharo
Project" team
seems to have achieved more in 1 year than Squeak had in a
decade - from my
point of view :)
Yeah but I actually had a plan, and that plan was manifest in
lots of technology improvements that are external to the core. The fact that
pharo core moved on, did not mean that it was leaving squeak behind, because
Pharo still doesn't have have any of those improvements, you are still limping
along with only one core group of developers in charge, no test tools, and none
of the actual problems I need fixing have been fixed yet. (changes file
limits?) We were just putting our emphasis in different places. We wanted
tools like atomic loading. (unfortunately Pharo team took the expertise needed
to make that happen)
People doing actual work can cope with a less than optimal core for a few
years. However having package management and testing tools that work is far more
useful. We did all that in the squeak community. But due to the squeak
board panicing and throwing all of the 4 years of progress away because they
didn't understand the extent of it. They too went back to a 3.10 base image and
forked, so now it does indeed look like squeak made no progress. My point of
view is that squeak has made much more progress on important things than pharo
has. When I started using squeak it was unusable because it wasn't possible to
load anything due to lack of documentation of dependencies. Now due to
politics all of those advances have been binned and so Pharo wins by
default.
There should not even be a competition. I detest competition, and because
everything I have tried to do in collaboration over 4 years has ended up in a
competition, this has led me to simply leave the community. In 4 years I have
only ever had 2 people offer to work with me on something.
I am a bit confused what the idea of Squeak using PharoCore as the base
(or
core) would be? Is the suggestion to have Squeak become a
sub-project of
No the idea would be to share common core packages such as
Network, Collections, Compiler, building upon usage of common packages such as
MC and SUnit, which are needed for loading and testing.
Pharo, building on top of PharoCore in a similar way as Pharo
(dev/web)
does? I wouldn't think the Squeak team is willing to
handover the "core" to
Pharo, otherwise there would never have been a Pharo
project in the first
place .... or am I barking up the wrong tree?
The Pharo team never asked for the opportunity to develop the new version
of squeak if they had submitted a proposal at the time, I am sure it would have
been considered. However they didn't want to be involved in the politics,
and I cant say I blame them.
Anyhow, better package
management and code sharing (simpler)
would be great :)
Sake/Packages was available a year ago.
Keith