[Pharo-project] Think about migration upfront! (was Re: squeaksource is down - a different perspective)

Miguel Cobá miguel.coba at gmail.com
Mon May 2 17:37:34 CEST 2011

Sometimes it is just enough to let the old versions in the old system
and start afresh in the new system with the last version of the project.

I think that the main reason for a project not being accepted is that
they lack enough traction and aren't end-user appealing.

Also, there can be a few hard core users of a system but the real
measure of impact is the number of new users they got. A bad (or good)
example, some years ago there was MySpace. It was the site all the
garage bands want to be in. It was the place for young people. Then
there comes Facebook and in just a couple years put MySpace to bite the
dust. There was a way to "migrate" your info (post, messages, pics) from
MySpace to Facebook? I (really) don't know, but I doubt that if they
existed they could make the migration faster that it was. The people
just went away to the new shiny, easier, more social and more appealing
that the old crap that MySpace pages were.

People sometimes doesn't care for the past. Just a good system (I am not
talking about facebook anymore, I don't use it) is enough to move a lot
of people from old system to new system.


El lun, 02-05-2011 a las 10:00 +0200, Janko Mivšek escribió:
> I think we should learn very carefully from Gemstone migration
> experiences to develop our Smalltalk systems *upfront* with migration in
> mind.
> Just see all recent (or less recent) examples: MC2 seems too radical to
> be easily migrated from MC1 and obviously designed without migration in
> mind, SqueakSource as well, SS3 too?
> Such systems just don't have any chance to be accepted and old systems
> will live and live instead. So, don't develop just a "cool" stuff, take
> some time to think about migration and long-term maintenance issues as
> well, if you like that your system will be accepted with the community
> to your glory :)
> Janko
> On 27. 04. 2011 22:16, Dale Henrichs wrote:
> > Since you mention GemStone:)
> > 
> > We have customers who have migrated repositories created 10+ years ago
> > with our 32 bit product to the latest current version of our 64 bit
> > product.
> > 
> > We have changed our Smalltalk class-library over the years and customers
> > have had to upgrade their own class libraries if they chose to continue
> > taking advantage of our newer releases ... then there are some who have
> > chosen not to migrate: I think there are still production applications
> > running GemStone on a version 20 years old:) ... as long as their
> > hardware holds out they are fine:)
> > 
> > Production customers don't tend to move very fast in upgrading their
> > hardware and software so we end up supporting older versions of oSes for
> > quite awhile...But when the os vendor announces and end of life of an
> > os, it becomes difficult for us to continue to support that version...
> > 
> > For the older versions we  backport critical bugfixes to the older
> > versions as long as their are active customers (read paying maintenance
> > dollars) using the older versions.
> > 
> > Dale

Miguel Cobá

More information about the Pharo-project mailing list