[Pharo-project] Smalltalk for small projects only?

Philippe Marschall kustos at gmx.net
Sun Jan 29 17:03:34 EST 2012

On 29.01.2012 22:31, Chris Muller wrote:
> But the goal of making the image smaller is congruent with the goal of
> making Morphic smaller, which would be congruent with the desire for
> Monticello to be "scalable".

What are you talking about? I chose Morphic because it was the first 
package I found that had more than a dozen classes.

> So the solution should be smaller
> packages, not more and bigger tools.

You should chose the package size on what makes sense from a software 
design point of view, not what the scalability limit of your tools is.

> Besides, the measure of scale you've chosen is an build /
> initialization step, which can much more afford to be "slow",
> especially if the dream is to just have it sit and build 24 hours a
> day.
> A better non-scaling measure to recognize in Monticello, IMO, is using
> FileBased repositories, which require enumeration of an ever-growing
> number of versions for many of its operations.
> Using a database-backed MC repository solves that.

What are we discussing here? What is or the STPF?


More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list