[Pharo-project] [Smalltalk for small projects only?
steve at wart.ca
Sun Jan 29 14:58:29 EST 2012
On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Philippe Marschall <kustos at gmx.net> wrote:
> On 29.01.2012 17:29, Steve Wart wrote:
>> Big legacy projects are still using Envy for VisualWorks less for the
>> reasons listed below, but mostly because it's extremely difficult to
>> migrate to Store without doing a "big bang" and most of these projects
>> don't have 200+ developers anymore anyhow (disclaimer: I'm only familiar
>> with 2 or 3 of these "success stories"). Many of the big Smalltalk
>> projects were mostly done using Envy, and it's a powerful tool, in spite
>> of its limitations. If there was a reliable way to move the latest
>> changes from a set of Envy configuration maps into Store, it would make
>> it much easier to get away from ancient, buggy and unsupported SCMs
>> (like Envy/GemKit).
> So in something like ten (10) years they haven't managed to migrate await
> form said SCMs
OOCL and JP Morgan are still using Envy (although I've heard that JPM has
purchased a license from IBM and maintains an in-house fork with the latest
version of VW). I believe UBS has migrated to Store, but their team is very
small and tight-knit. It's been very hard for big distributed shops to
migrate SCM from Envy to Store. I think that Cincom has provided consulting
support for that but I don't think they've provided any stats on the cost
or effort to migrate a typical project.
VA shops continue to use Envy as a supported and effective SCM but I
haven't used VA commercially, but I'm assuming it works for them.
It's not surprising that this old stuff doesn't get migrated given how IT
projects are funded in general. When you've got hundreds of Java servers
spewing errors all day, it's hard to get excited about some old Smalltalk
stuff that just keeps the business chugging along.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pharo-dev