[Pharo-project] relation to squeak
Hello! One thing is not clear to me. How is Pharo related to standard Squeak? I know Pharo is a fork with its own mission, but is the development related? Do fixes in Pharo propagate upstream to Squeak? Is Squeak even considered "upstream"? Do fixes in Squeak propagate into Pharo? Automatically or manually? Or have they started being developed completely independently from some point in time? -- Milan Mimica http://sparklet.sf.net
While there is no official relationship, it seems to me that the communities are becoming very friendly and symbiotic, after the initial tension that always accompanies a "break up" ;-) There were lively, fun, interesting dinners including key members of both at ESUG this year. Fixes are propagated both ways if the devs think they are valuable. Much of the API seems to still be the same, as the major focus so far seems to be clean up. During this process, Pharo has been much more aggressive about removing ugly/dirty code because backward compatibility is not as primary to the mission as it is in Squeak. Also, there are many exciting fundamental projects underway in Pharo (new filesystem, compiler, browser, on and on), so the forks may diverge quite a bit in the near future. HTH, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/relation-to-squeak-tp3986029p3986229.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On 3 November 2011 15:05, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
While there is no official relationship, it seems to me that the communities are becoming very friendly and symbiotic, after the initial tension that always accompanies a "break up" ;-) There were lively, fun, interesting dinners including key members of both at ESUG this year. Fixes are propagated both ways if the devs think they are valuable. Much of the API seems to still be the same, as the major focus so far seems to be clean up. During this process, Pharo has been much more aggressive about removing ugly/dirty code because backward compatibility is not as primary to the mission as it is in Squeak. Also, there are many exciting fundamental projects underway in Pharo (new filesystem, compiler, browser, on and on), so the forks may diverge quite a bit in the near future.
There are also a number of folks spending time in both communities: I wouldn't be surprised to see many of those exciting new projects being ported to Squeak. frank
HTH, Sean
-- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/relation-to-squeak-tp3986029p3986229.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hello!
One thing is not clear to me. How is Pharo related to standard Squeak? I know Pharo is a fork with its own mission, but is the development related? Do fixes in Pharo propagate upstream to Squeak? Is Squeak even considered "upstream"? Do fixes in Squeak propagate into Pharo? Automatically or manually? Or have they started being developed completely independently from some point in time?
We do not really look at squeak. No time for that. Now if people having time mentioned that we have an interesting fix then we will be inclined to include it in pharo. Let me restate our vision and why we decided to make Pharo. Our goal and vision behind Pharo is to twofold: - make sure that people can make money and create their own wealth in Smalltalk. Provide the best environment we can for that (and this is not easy) This is really important for us. A part of the team here is working on setting up a company around tools build on top of Pharo. We are really happy when we hear that people are using Pharo for making business (net style, nextPlan, b9, pinesoft)â¦. This is really great. - bring Smalltalk to the next level: - first class variables - small core - may be new mop - powerful tools and abstractions The idea is to have a solid infrastructure to be able to invent the next generation smalltalkish system because smalltalk lacks a lot and innovation stopped a while ago. (real sandboxing, real minimal kernel with pluggable uiâ¦) It will take time but we will get there. Stef
On 3 November 2011 19:41, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
Hello!
One thing is not clear to me. How is Pharo related to standard Squeak? I know Pharo is a fork with its own mission, but is the development related? Do fixes in Pharo propagate upstream to Squeak? Is Squeak even considered "upstream"? Do fixes in Squeak propagate into Pharo? Automatically or manually? Or have they started being developed completely independently from some point in time?
We do not really look at squeak. No time for that. Now if people having time mentioned that we have an interesting fix then we will be inclined to include it in pharo.
Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by "we" - "we" as an Official Pharo Official, sure, I can understand - rightly so - that you're concentrating on what Pharo needs. "We" as a vocal subcommunity of Pharo also work with Squeak, trying to pull the two codebases back together. And that's a good thing, that there are both forces. Pharo the Official Direction is cutting new ground in a particular direction, and the Pharo+Squeak folk try to make sure that there isn't too much duplication of effort. There are few enough Smalltalkers in the two communities: we ought to try leverage off each other as much as we can. frank
Let me restate our vision and why we decided to make Pharo. Our goal and vision behind Pharo is to twofold:     - make sure that people can make money and create their own wealth in Smalltalk. Provide the best environment we can for that (and this is not easy)     This is really important for us. A part of the team here is working on setting up a company around tools build on top of Pharo.     We are really happy when we hear that people are using Pharo for making business (net style, nextPlan, b9, pinesoft)â¦.     This is really great.
    - bring Smalltalk to the next level:         - first class variables         - small core         - may be new mop         - powerful tools and abstractions     The idea is to have a solid infrastructure to be able to invent the next generation smalltalkish system because smalltalk lacks a lot and innovation stopped a while ago.         (real sandboxing, real minimal kernel with pluggable uiâ¦)
It will take time but we will get there.
Stef
Frank When I write we usually talk about my team or myself. Now I have a question: did you sign the pharo license because else it would indicate that you are not really interested in contributing to our vision but more taking from it. This is ok too. You can do that but this is less positive energy. Stef
Hello!
One thing is not clear to me. How is Pharo related to standard Squeak? I know Pharo is a fork with its own mission, but is the development related? Do fixes in Pharo propagate upstream to Squeak? Is Squeak even considered "upstream"? Do fixes in Squeak propagate into Pharo? Automatically or manually? Or have they started being developed completely independently from some point in time?
We do not really look at squeak. No time for that. Now if people having time mentioned that we have an interesting fix then we will be inclined to include it in pharo.
Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by "we" - "we" as an Official Pharo Official, sure, I can understand - rightly so - that you're concentrating on what Pharo needs. "We" as a vocal subcommunity of Pharo also work with Squeak, trying to pull the two codebases back together.
And that's a good thing, that there are both forces. Pharo the Official Direction is cutting new ground in a particular direction, and the Pharo+Squeak folk try to make sure that there isn't too much duplication of effort. There are few enough Smalltalkers in the two communities: we ought to try leverage off each other as much as we can.
frank
Let me restate our vision and why we decided to make Pharo. Our goal and vision behind Pharo is to twofold: - make sure that people can make money and create their own wealth in Smalltalk. Provide the best environment we can for that (and this is not easy) This is really important for us. A part of the team here is working on setting up a company around tools build on top of Pharo. We are really happy when we hear that people are using Pharo for making business (net style, nextPlan, b9, pinesoft)â¦. This is really great.
- bring Smalltalk to the next level: - first class variables - small core - may be new mop - powerful tools and abstractions The idea is to have a solid infrastructure to be able to invent the next generation smalltalkish system because smalltalk lacks a lot and innovation stopped a while ago. (real sandboxing, real minimal kernel with pluggable uiâ¦)
It will take time but we will get there.
Stef
On 4 November 2011 08:28, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
Frank
When I write we usually talk about my team or myself.
Yes, I know. I just wanted to indicate that the Pharo/Squeak split is not as severe, for want of a better word, as might seem at first. While Pharo and Squeak have different goals, they're not antithetical goals.
Now I have a question: did you sign the pharo license because else it would indicate that you are not really interested in contributing to our vision but more taking from it. This is ok too. You can do that but this is less positive energy.
Actually, I have, but I must still post it off to you. Thanks for the reminder! (And of course the libraries I put on SqueakSource (zippers, delimited continuations, and so on) are all MIT, and I would be most appreciative of bug reports, critiques etc., that members of the Pharo community might send my way. frank
Stef
Hello!
One thing is not clear to me. How is Pharo related to standard Squeak? I know Pharo is a fork with its own mission, but is the development related? Do fixes in Pharo propagate upstream to Squeak? Is Squeak even considered "upstream"? Do fixes in Squeak propagate into Pharo? Automatically or manually? Or have they started being developed completely independently from some point in time?
We do not really look at squeak. No time for that. Now if people having time mentioned that we have an interesting fix then we will be inclined to include it in pharo.
Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by "we" - "we" as an Official Pharo Official, sure, I can understand - rightly so - that you're concentrating on what Pharo needs. "We" as a vocal subcommunity of Pharo also work with Squeak, trying to pull the two codebases back together.
And that's a good thing, that there are both forces. Pharo the Official Direction is cutting new ground in a particular direction, and the Pharo+Squeak folk try to make sure that there isn't too much duplication of effort. There are few enough Smalltalkers in the two communities: we ought to try leverage off each other as much as we can.
frank
Let me restate our vision and why we decided to make Pharo. Our goal and vision behind Pharo is to twofold:     - make sure that people can make money and create their own wealth in Smalltalk. Provide the best environment we can for that (and this is not easy)     This is really important for us. A part of the team here is working on setting up a company around tools build on top of Pharo.     We are really happy when we hear that people are using Pharo for making business (net style, nextPlan, b9, pinesoft)â¦.     This is really great.
    - bring Smalltalk to the next level:         - first class variables         - small core         - may be new mop         - powerful tools and abstractions     The idea is to have a solid infrastructure to be able to invent the next generation smalltalkish system because smalltalk lacks a lot and innovation stopped a while ago.         (real sandboxing, real minimal kernel with pluggable uiâ¦)
It will take time but we will get there.
Stef
participants (4)
-
Frank Shearar -
Milan Mimica -
Sean P. DeNigris -
Stéphane Ducasse