[Pharo-project] Re: Pharo Smalltalk
Couldn't you do this on Squeak?
So, couldn't you continue on Squeak?
Because - 1 we need freedom. We do not want to maintain: etoy, nebraska, alice and the like. We do not want to have other people putting stress and their dreams on us. We did that for 3.9 and people pissed on us (random refactorers...) complained that we pushed traits in Squeak..... read the archives of the mailing-list everything is there. - 2 people said that we did not have a process, that social engineering was the solution (which is true when you apply it). - 3 we proposed a 3.10 roadmap and people complained. - 4 we proposed our help to 3.10 but it was declined. - 6 after the sad adventure of 3.10 and the lack of reaction of people we decided that we did our best. in 3.9 we harvested 625 bugs fixed but apparently this was not valuable. We think that 3.9 was a positive experience even if marcus got sick and burnt out. - 7 The squeak model is flawed. We do not want a model were consumers can put exigences on producers. Even if good customers are important and this is why we want to have Aida/Seaside and a lot of cool projects to run on pharo. - 8 I'm sick of opening squeak and having to turn my eyes from problems. After a certain point we should learn and take decision even if they are not easy.
I can't understand why you forked the project instead of improving it.
Because we do not want to have complain all the times. We want to be able to invent the future, rethink design decision, apply good practices but not maintain the cool but old features and experiments of others. Sorry but we did that and now this is over. We are also sorry but we do not believe in big bang changes and we waited too much after spoon. So may be we are wrong, probably but again we had to do something for ourselves.
I do not know. FunSqueak ;D
So you quit Squeak...
Not really. We will work on a new Volume Two and we did not renamed yet our book Pharo by Example :) May be pharo will be a cool squeak distribution or something else. For now our focus is getting things done.
I still can't see a valid reason for this fork.
There are plenty of them but may be you are not in the right places to understand them. Here is an extra one. I have no choice this is pharo or ruby and I'm not joking. I was terribly sad when I see people willing to go back to 3.8! We spent a lot of energy to make sure that the forks could reunite but now this is over. We tried to really make a better Squeak and got sick, burnt and more. So now if I do not want to destroy the little flame we have for Smalltalk we **must** do pharo, because this is like new dry wood that you put on the fire place. It brings exciting future. Stef
- 1 we need freedom. We do not want to maintain: etoy, nebraska, alice and the like.
It's about time that stuff got dumped.
in 3.9 we harvested 625 bugs fixed but apparently this was not valuable. We think that 3.9 was a positive experience even if marcus got sick and burnt out.
3.9 was the best release I've used yet. I'm glad someone is thinking about a *serious* open source Smalltalk instead of arguing about how they miss that stupid mouse or whining about eToys.
- 7 The squeak model is flawed. We do not want a model were consumers can put exigences on producers. Even if good customers are important and this is why we want to have Aida/Seaside and a lot of cool projects to run on pharo.
The image is looking very nice so far, I loved it when I opened a menu and all the crap I never use was finally gone. I excited to see where you take Pharo, but it's off to a good start.
Because we do not want to have complain all the times. We want to be able to invent the future, rethink design decision, apply good practices but not maintain the cool but old features and experiments of others. Sorry but we did that and now this is over. We are also sorry but we do not believe in big bang changes and we waited too much after spoon. So may be we are wrong, probably but again we had to do something for ourselves.
You're not wrong. Make Pharo into a serious clean open source Smalltalk kernel that can run Seaside and when the masses come for Seaside they'll choose Pharo over Squeak and Pharo could easily become the larger community. All that legacy stuff in Squeak is holding it back and stopping the mainstream from giving it a chance. Squeak is ugly, cluttered, unfocused, full of garbage that most developers will never need or use, and apparently stagnant because part of the community resists any and all change. Maybe Squeak 4.0 will fix that, maybe it won't, but so far Pharo is starting to look like the best distro for the future.
We tried to really make a better Squeak and got sick, burnt and more. So now if I do not want to destroy the little flame we have for Smalltalk we **must** do pharo, because this is like new dry wood that you put on the fire place. It brings exciting future.
Stef
You did make a better Squeak, and I look forward to seeing Pharo burn the diskpacks a bit and throw out all the crap bogging Squeak down. Keep up the good work, some of us do appreciate it. Ramon Leon http://onsmalltalk.com
3.9 was the best release I've used yet. I'm glad someone is thinking about a *serious* open source Smalltalk instead of arguing about how they miss that stupid mouse or whining about eToys.
******THANKS******* you cannot imagine how it is a good feeling to hear that.
- 7 The squeak model is flawed. We do not want a model were consumers can put exigences on producers. Even if good customers are important and this is why we want to have Aida/Seaside and a lot of cool projects to run on pharo.
The image is looking very nice so far, I loved it when I opened a menu and all the crap I never use was finally gone. I excited to see where you take Pharo, but it's off to a good start.
our plan is to work steadily and slowly on improvement. If you have suggestion, bugs report, code fixes, concerns about our process, just say it. I just realized that I must must must run the test before publishing a new update. I was too ill to think :)
You did make a better Squeak, and I look forward to seeing Pharo burn the diskpacks a bit and throw out all the crap bogging Squeak down. Keep up the good work, some of us do appreciate it.
Thanks. We will try our best. Marcus do you hear that :) because marcus was really burnt by squeak :(
Ramon Leon http://onsmalltalk.com
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Just an important point I want to add: for me I do not oppose beauty and fun. One of the goal of pharo is to get beauty and beautiful, clean and lean (and fast) abstractions. I want people to be able to learn and grow themselves from it. I'm tired to say to the smart people I worked with: don't look at that or that because this is too old and fragile and patched. Now based on beautiful abstractions people should be able to create other fun stuff. I never understood why people oppose these two notions. I want nice code to go fast in the next generation.... stef
On 05.07.2008, at 08:49, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
3.9 was the best release I've used yet. I'm glad someone is thinking about a *serious* open source Smalltalk instead of arguing about how they miss that stupid mouse or whining about eToys.
******THANKS******* you cannot imagine how it is a good feeling to hear that.
indeed. About etoys: It's not that I don't like the idea. I continue to be a big fan of the dynabook idea. But etoys was not well done from an implementation standpoint (impossible to maintain). In addition, those working on squeakland never where interested in working together with anyone.
You did make a better Squeak, and I look forward to seeing Pharo burn the diskpacks a bit and throw out all the crap bogging Squeak down. Keep up the good work, some of us do appreciate it.
Thanks. We will try our best. Marcus do you hear that :) because marcus was really burnt by squeak :(
Yes. And only very slowly recovering. Marcus -- Marcus Denker -- denker@iam.unibe.ch http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~denker
We agree. There is no bad etoy good seaside. I did again demo of etoys to kids at RMLL :)
About etoys: It's not that I don't like the idea. I continue to be a big fan of the dynabook idea. But etoys was not well done from an implementation standpoint (impossible to maintain). In addition, those working on squeakland never where interested in working together with anyone.
participants (3)
-
Marcus Denker -
Ramon Leon -
Stéphane Ducasse