On May 16, 2012, at 9:23 AM, Pavel Krivanek wrote:
On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:29 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
It depends. Pharo 2.0 is UNSTABLE. It says it everywhere. If you want to do seriuous development you won't beusing Pharo 2.0, will you? ;)
I talked about that few days ago with Germán. The problem is not in using of unstable version. The problem is that it is very easy to stop to be in touch with Pharo now and within one year when the current unstable version will become stable the developers will face to very different system. That is one of the reason why Germán choose Cuis for his current projects. Developers want simple predictable system.
Absolutely wonderful. So what people wants just the same. Ok but this is not Pharo. And and and again again again and again who is concerned by RPackage vs PackageInfo, systemNotifier vs. announcement, better monticello, better canvas, better Zincâ¦. I find that a totally false argument.
I will quote Germán (I hope he will not mind): "lot and lot of things... Lot of new things each day.
Part of that is that I started the project "tweet something about Pharo every day". some 15 months? ago... my idea was that we need to make public what happens because most people's perception was : Smalltak is dead. If people want I can stop.
Not time to stabilize nothing.
Pharo 1.4 is frozen. We just fix bugs. The same with 1.3. Or even 1.2...
Is needed such acceleration? ... My point is, I'm trying to move a business with Smalltalk and the acceleration of Pharo is well know by me (from other companies) and sooner or later, impact in my job and I'm a very LITTLE software house can't migrate my products all the time."
You should *not* migrate. That's the idea. Just as one uses a (in the future unchanging Cuis, I am sorry to hear that), you can use an unchaning Pharo 1.4, or 1.3. Only when your project needs it, (because you actively with manpower develop it for a longer time), you can move to a new version.
We simply have to accept that some developers can have this feelings and try to find a way how to limit it. I think that some official Pharo blog (maybe written by Esteban) would be very helpful. Some kind of not very extensive technical information source that will help people to stay in touch with Pharo progress. That will explain what is being changed in Pharo and why. I think that developers than will see the changes like positive not as alien ones.
What I think is problematic: Peopler are against Change. But when somone nevertheless does it, build a great system, the same people that did not allow us to move will gladly abandon the old system for the new system. Cuis is a good example. According to the Philosophy of German, it should not exist. Maybe we should partition the *mailinglist* by stable and unstable? This way people using the stable don't see the noise and can focus... Marcus -- Marcus Denker -- http://marcusdenker.de