My hunch is that Stef is against loading it in its current state. Any well-factored and optional package should be welcome. I am thrilled to see Gary on board! Bill Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. University of Florida Department of Anesthesiology PO Box 100254 Gainesville, FL 32610-0254 Email: bschwab@anest.ufl.edu Tel: (352) 846-1285 FAX: (352) 392-7029
damien.cassou@gmail.com 6/3/2008 10:50 AM >>> On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:47 PM, Damien Cassou <damien.cassou@gmail.com> wrote: On Tue, Jun 3, 2008 at 5:39 PM, Gary Chambers <gazzaguru2@btinternet.com> wrote: Damien,
I don't, particularly! Just wondering what the approach is here... quite happy to rip it out altogether (might get a bit zealous with it!). Early indications are that around 200 methods can be dropped from Morph alone!
Will wait for the inbox to settle first before applying my investigations to Pahro though.
I was asking the question to Stéphane who said:
"No reload of Etoy (as its current state) is important else it will reintroduce cruft"
Now that I read again the sentence, I think it can have 2 different meanings: "No ! reload of etoy is important !" or "reload of etoy is not important" Which one is correct? Knowing Stef, I would vote for 2 but I thought he meant 1. -- Damien Cassou Peter von der Ahé: «I'm beginning to see why Gilad wished us good luck». (http://blogs.sun.com/ahe/entry/override_snafu) _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project