[Pharo-project] CLFramework and Pharo
I've just noticed that "nullPointer" now recreated http://www.squeaksource.com/CLFramework again and uploaded CLFramework-nullPointer.90.mcz This time the code has a BSD license. The page says "Failed attempt of visual UI builder for Pharo-Polymorph. Abbandoned. Only works in Pharo 1.0"
From my point of view:
1. This sounds very negative and I dont understand what lead to this decision. Similar to the decision to delete the project on SqS midway. Especially since the previews looked really really good. Is it a time or other issue on nullpointer's side or did the community fail in support... 2. This looks to me as if the project will stop now with 1.0 and is not moved to 1.1. or 1.2 3. I dont understand why the license changed from MIT to BSD but that does not allow us to include the now released version 90 or further work in the MIT licensed pharo-dev. I expect a day in the life of Pharo where people will demand more support to build visual tools. So to create a UI Builder the community - either has to start from scratch then - or continue with the project as a fork based on an earlier version ("CLFramework-nullPointer.70.mcz" was the last one released as MIT) Really sad. Bye T. -- GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT! Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01
Indeed what I really want to know: - why is it considered as failed ? - what were the errors made ? - if we re-start from scratch, what we should *not* do ? - if we fork it, what should we trash / rewrite ? It's sad because "nullPointer" must have gain a lot of experience doing this, even if he doesn't like the code he has written, bump on hard issues, .... nullpointer, the code is important, sharing your experience is *far* more important. Please, do so. Cheers, Laurent Laffont http://pharocasts.blogspot.com/ http://magaloma.blogspot.com/ On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Torsten Bergmann <astares@gmx.de> wrote:
I've just noticed that "nullPointer" now recreated http://www.squeaksource.com/CLFramework again and uploaded CLFramework-nullPointer.90.mcz
This time the code has a BSD license. The page says "Failed attempt of visual UI builder for Pharo-Polymorph. Abbandoned. Only works in Pharo 1.0"
From my point of view:
1. This sounds very negative and I dont understand what lead to this decision. Similar to the decision to delete the project on SqS midway. Especially since the previews looked really really good. Is it a time or other issue on nullpointer's side or did the community fail in support...
2. This looks to me as if the project will stop now with 1.0 and is not moved to 1.1. or 1.2
3. I dont understand why the license changed from MIT to BSD but that does not allow us to include the now released version 90 or further work in the MIT licensed pharo-dev.
I expect a day in the life of Pharo where people will demand more support to build visual tools. So to create a UI Builder the community
- either has to start from scratch then - or continue with the project as a fork based on an earlier version ("CLFramework-nullPointer.70.mcz" was the last one released as MIT)
Really sad.
Bye T.
-- GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT! Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
I've just noticed that "nullPointer" now recreated http://www.squeaksource.com/CLFramework again and uploaded CLFramework-nullPointer.90.mcz
Cool! This is a great news.
This time the code has a BSD license. The page says "Failed attempt of visual UI builder for Pharo-Polymorph. Abbandoned. Only works in Pharo 1.0"
From my point of view:
1. This sounds very negative and I dont understand what lead to this decision.
Me neither.
Similar to the decision to delete the project on SqS midway. Especially since the previews looked really really good. Is it a time or other issue on nullpointer's side or did the community fail in support...
No idea
2. This looks to me as if the project will stop now with 1.0 and is not moved to 1.1. or 1.2
But may be people can port it.
3. I dont understand why the license changed from MIT to BSD but that does not allow us to include the now released version 90 or further work in the MIT licensed pharo-dev.
BSD and MIT are compatible and I'm sure that we can ask the author to change it
I expect a day in the life of Pharo where people will demand more support to build visual tools. So to create a UI Builder the community
- either has to start from scratch then - or continue with the project as a fork based on an earlier version ("CLFramework-nullPointer.70.mcz" was the last one released as MIT)
Does it load in pharo1.1?
Really sad.
Bye T.
-- GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT! Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Regards >3. I dont understand why the license changed from MIT to BSD but >that does not allow us to include the now released version 90 or further > work in the MIT licensed pharo-dev. Don´t exists problem for change the license. What differences exists between one and other? >I expect a day in the life of Pharo where people will demand more support to build >visual tools. So to create a UI Builder the community >- either has to start from scratch then >- or continue with the project as a fork based on an earlier version > ("CLFramework-nullPointer.70.mcz" was the last one released as MIT) I believe is best create another from scratch, but with WPF like model and XAML as UI definition language. That is for people with best knowledges. The current version is 90. The main difference is addition of grid control. PS. I´m wrong before and did send the answer directly your mail, excuse me.
On Jun 30, 2010, at 12:53 PM, nullPointer wrote:
Regards
3. I dont understand why the license changed from MIT to BSD but that does not allow us to include the now released version 90 or further work in the MIT licensed pharo-dev.
Don´t exists problem for change the license. What differences exists between one and other?
there are equivalent: moose is developed under BSD on top of Pharo MIT Now we prefer all the pharo code to be MIT.
I expect a day in the life of Pharo where people will demand more support to build
visual tools. So to create a UI Builder the community
- either has to start from scratch then - or continue with the project as a fork based on an earlier version ("CLFramework-nullPointer.70.mcz" was the last one released as MIT)
I believe is best create another from scratch, but with WPF like model and XAML as UI definition language. That is for people with best knowledges.
I'm not convinced that we cannot learn from your development.
The current version is 90. The main difference is addition of grid control.
PS. I´m wrong before and did send the answer directly your mail, excuse me.
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
I believe is best create another from scratch, but with WPF like model and XAML as UI definition language. That is for people with best knowledges.
I'm not convinced that we cannot learn from your development.
Because is needed change the current exposition to something like that: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-T-yF3tXCc&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyO7v06xlWM&feature=related Forget for a moment that is from M$ XD The wonderful of that is the language for define the UI interface, XAML, where you can describe not only basic propertys of "morph" like colors or positions, but too animations, mouseOver effects, timers, movies... And you can use editors of XAML, external from environment, for create more rich UIs. The current UIBuilder is based on old mechanism for build views, and surely with a lot of errors. I believe that that is the best direction for something more new and correct.
On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 3:55 PM, nullPointer <epicfan@gmail.com> wrote:
I believe is best create another from scratch, but with WPF like model and XAML as UI definition language. That is for people with best knowledges.
I'm not convinced that we cannot learn from your development.
Because is needed change the current exposition to something like that:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-T-yF3tXCc&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyO7v06xlWM&feature=related
Forget for a moment that is from M$ XD The wonderful of that is the language for define the UI interface, XAML, where you can describe not only basic propertys of "morph" like colors or positions, but too animations, mouseOver effects, timers, movies... And you can use editors of XAML, external from environment, for create more rich UIs.
I don't think WPF/XAML/whatever is good or bad (indeed I don't care :). But I think there's lot of value in having UIBuilder with "old mechanism" *now*. Do you think we can easily get it out of experimental / alpha state ? Or is there design/architecture mistakes such as thinking of creating applications with it is harmful ? For the future, something based on Morphic 3 isn't the right way ? Cheers, Laurent
The current UIBuilder is based on old mechanism for build views, and surely with a lot of errors. I believe that that is the best direction for something more new and correct.
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
If you are generating XML, perhaps that should be left to SIXX?? The result should be very close to Dolphin's ViewComposer, which is a very powerful tool. There are some traps to avoid with conversion of the serializer's output, but I can hopefully advise on where those might arise. It's unclear to me whether Dolphin's "recent" conversion to view resources as source code is a bad idea or simply under-supported in the area of conversion of existing view resources. Serializer output worked, with some caveats of dependence on layout changes and limitations on browsing into view resources, at least when they are in their dormant state. We are starting with real closures, dodging a bullet that hurt Dolphin. ________________________________ From: pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr [mailto:pharo-project-bounces@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of laurent laffont Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 9:15 AM To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] CLFramework and Pharo On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 3:55 PM, nullPointer <epicfan@gmail.com<mailto:epicfan@gmail.com>> wrote:
I believe is best create another from scratch, but with WPF like model and XAML as UI definition language. That is for people with best knowledges.
I'm not convinced that we cannot learn from your development.
Because is needed change the current exposition to something like that: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-T-yF3tXCc&feature=related http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RyO7v06xlWM&feature=related Forget for a moment that is from M$ XD The wonderful of that is the language for define the UI interface, XAML, where you can describe not only basic propertys of "morph" like colors or positions, but too animations, mouseOver effects, timers, movies... And you can use editors of XAML, external from environment, for create more rich UIs. I don't think WPF/XAML/whatever is good or bad (indeed I don't care :). But I think there's lot of value in having UIBuilder with "old mechanism" *now*. Do you think we can easily get it out of experimental / alpha state ? Or is there design/architecture mistakes such as thinking of creating applications with it is harmful ? For the future, something based on Morphic 3 isn't the right way ? Cheers, Laurent The current UIBuilder is based on old mechanism for build views, and surely with a lot of errors. I believe that that is the best direction for something more new and correct. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr<mailto:Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
participants (5)
-
laurent laffont -
nullPointer -
Schwab,Wilhelm K -
Stéphane Ducasse -
Torsten Bergmann