sadly enough... Le 19/10/15 16:27, Levente Uzonyi a écrit :

This is because for some unknown reason the creators of Smalltalkhub decided to use hashbang urls at a time when it was already considered bad practice to do so[1]. Crawlers can't crawl such pages, unless there are non-hashbang versions provided as well[2], but I strongly doubt Smalltalkhub has anything like that.

Levente

[1] http://isolani.co.uk/blog/javascript/BreakingTheWebWithHashBangs [2] https://developers.google.com/webmasters/ajax-crawling/docs/learn-more

On Mon, 19 Oct 2015, Jan Kurš wrote:

...

Hi,

I noticed that my projects on Smalltalkhub cannot be googled :( I have project set up as a public, I actively develop and update the overview page for several months, but even the query: smalltalkhub <myname> <nameOfMyProject> does not find anything.

Is there a way to help this?

Cheers, Jan

SmalltalkHub looks great but lacks the features of SqueakSource3. It would be great if we could switch the backend to SS3 while keeping the look of STHub. Amber is nice, but a single page JS app that uses infinite scrolling everywhere is just not a good fit for this kind of site, because search engines still don't index them well (look at any complex single page app made with Angular.js). if searchability matters, this isn't acceptable, and when you're browsing a repo with a huge number of packages (like the Pharo50Inbox), infinite scrolling is less user friendly and probably less efficient than boring old page numbers.

Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 at 3:26 AM From: stepharo <stepharo@free.fr> To: "Pharo Development List" <pharo-dev@lists.pharo.org> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] Smalltalkhub projects not indexed?

...

So the #! URL syntax was especially geared for sites that got the fundamental web development best practices horribly wrong, and gave them a lifeline to getting their content seen by Googlebot.

And today, this emergency rescue package seems to be regarded as the One True Way of web development by engineers from Facebook, Twitter, and now Lifehacker.

Makes me cry :(

Le 19/10/15 16:27, Levente Uzonyi a écrit :

...

This is because for some unknown reason the creators of Smalltalkhub decided to use hashbang urls at a time when it was already considered bad practice to do so[1]. Crawlers can't crawl such pages, unless there are non-hashbang versions provided as well[2], but I strongly doubt Smalltalkhub has anything like that.

Levente

[1] http://isolani.co.uk/blog/javascript/BreakingTheWebWithHashBangs [2] https://developers.google.com/webmasters/ajax-crawling/docs/learn-more

On Mon, 19 Oct 2015, Jan Kurš wrote:

...

Hi,

I noticed that my projects on Smalltalkhub cannot be googled :( I have project set up as a public, I actively develop and update the overview page for several months, but even the query: smalltalkhub <myname> <nameOfMyProject> does not find anything.

Is there a way to help this?

Cheers, Jan

2015-10-22 12:19 GMT-03:00 Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com>:

On Oct 22, 2015, at 12:09 PM, monty <monty2@programmer.net> wrote:

SmalltalkHub looks great but lacks the features of SqueakSource3. It would be great if we could switch the backend to SS3 while keeping the look of STHub.

Having a reliable solution on GitHub will be even better in my opinion. Moreover, it will reveal that Pharo is within the top 20-languages.

+1

2015-10-22 12:30 GMT-03:00 monty <monty2@programmer.net>:

Github is a private VC funded company that we don't own that tomorrow could go away or adopt policies harmful to us. If Ruby can have rubygems.org (and if Steph can continue to get funding from INRIA/ESUG), then why can't we have something like STHub that's ours?

There is a confusion between "packaging" and "source management". Most "popular" languages have their own packaging system, in Ruby it is gem, in Node.js it is npm, Python has several. The closest to a package managment we have is Metacello with the MetaRepo. A different thing is the code management of those packages, and here it is where GitHub appears. Look for instance <https://rubygems.org/gems/json>, at at the same page the source code (and its website, docs, and other stuff) points to http://flori.github.com/json/ (GitHub). The same goes for Node, the Express package in npm <https://www.npmjs.com/package/express> hosts its code at <https://github.com/strongloop/express> We use the same thing for everything, when maybe we shouldn't. Esteban A. Maringolo

+1

Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 at 11:46 AM From: "Serge Stinckwich" <serge.stinckwich@gmail.com> To: "Pharo Development List" <pharo-dev@lists.pharo.org> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] Smalltalkhub projects not indexed?

I guess that Alexandre want to say git and not github.

What is important is to have git support on Pharo in the future so we can switch from github to bitbucket or any git hosting solution.

On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 5:30 PM, monty <monty2@programmer.net> wrote:

...

Github is a private VC funded company that we don't own that tomorrow could go away or adopt policies harmful to us. If Ruby can have rubygems.org (and if Steph can continue to get funding from INRIA/ESUG), then why can't we have something like STHub that's ours?

Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2015 at 11:19 AM From: "Alexandre Bergel" <alexandre.bergel@me.com> To: "Pharo Development List" <pharo-dev@lists.pharo.org> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] Smalltalkhub projects not indexed?

On Oct 22, 2015, at 12:09 PM, monty <monty2@programmer.net> wrote: SmalltalkHub looks great but lacks the features of SqueakSource3. It would be great if we could switch the backend to SS3 while keeping the look of STHub. Having a reliable solution on GitHub will be even better in my opinion. Moreover, it will reveal that Pharo is within the top 20-languages.

Alexandre

-- Serge Stinckwich UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/

Am 22.10.15 um 17:30 schrieb monty:

Github is a private VC funded company that we don't own that tomorrow could go away or adopt policies harmful to us. If Ruby can have rubygems.org (and if Steph can continue to get funding from INRIA/ESUG), then why can't we have something like STHub that's ours?

+1 Github may be hip today but can be outdated in a few years. If Smalltalk would have chosen a version management technology that was en vogue in the 80s where would it be now? Does anybody even remember one of those from then? Having nice github integration (or whatever might be the technology of the day) is one thing, completely relying on it is something different.

In the 80s? you probably mean SCCS... 2015-10-22 18:01 GMT+02:00 Esteban A. Maringolo <emaringolo@gmail.com>:

2015-10-22 12:57 GMT-03:00 Andreas Wacknitz <A.Wacknitz@gmx.de>:

...

Am 22.10.15 um 17:30 schrieb monty:

...

Github is a private VC funded company that we don't own that tomorrow could go away or adopt policies harmful to us. If Ruby can have

rubygems.org

...

(and if Steph can continue to get funding from INRIA/ESUG), then why can't we have something like STHub that's ours?

+1 Github may be hip today but can be outdated in a few years. If Smalltalk would have chosen a version management technology that was en vogue in the 80s where would it be now? Does anybody even remember one of those from then? Having nice github integration (or whatever might be the technology of the day) is one thing, completely relying on it is something different.

We would be using SourceForge, probably :). Some projects still use it. Which ones? Well... the ones using Subversion, mostly old projects (although still maintained).

But I couldn't find a new project choosing it over GitHub for code management.

Esteban A. Maringolo

I agree with you. Github should definitely not be the unique place for code. But we should be able to have code there at a low cost. Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

On Oct 22, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Andreas Wacknitz <a.wacknitz@gmx.de> wrote:

Am 22.10.15 um 17:30 schrieb monty:

...

Github is a private VC funded company that we don't own that tomorrow could go away or adopt policies harmful to us. If Ruby can have rubygems.org (and if Steph can continue to get funding from INRIA/ESUG), then why can't we have something like STHub that's ours?

+1 Github may be hip today but can be outdated in a few years. If Smalltalk would have chosen a version management technology that was en vogue in the 80s where would it be now? Does anybody even remember one of those from then? Having nice github integration (or whatever might be the technology of the day) is one thing, completely relying on it is something different.

Le 22/10/2015 21:00, Sven Van Caekenberghe a écrit :

Git is a DISTRIBUTED source code management system, it does not really live on one server. Technically, your and everybody else's local copy contains everything. You can move it around at will.

The github functionality on top of that *is* restricted to their site, although there are pretty good clones.

I would not fear for a lock in.

As long as we are agile, i.e. have the ability to switch to a new platform at reasonable cost, then I'm not worried. The Github choice is about exposure. Thierry

...

On 22 Oct 2015, at 20:15, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel@me.com> wrote:

I agree with you. Github should definitely not be the unique place for code. But we should be able to have code there at a low cost.

Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

...

On Oct 22, 2015, at 12:57 PM, Andreas Wacknitz <a.wacknitz@gmx.de> wrote:

Am 22.10.15 um 17:30 schrieb monty:

...

Github is a private VC funded company that we don't own that tomorrow could go away or adopt policies harmful to us. If Ruby can have rubygems.org (and if Steph can continue to get funding from INRIA/ESUG), then why can't we have something like STHub that's ours?

+1 Github may be hip today but can be outdated in a few years. If Smalltalk would have chosen a version management technology that was en vogue in the 80s where would it be now? Does anybody even remember one of those from then? Having nice github integration (or whatever might be the technology of the day) is one thing, completely relying on it is something different.