[Pharo-project] I give up. Squeaksource has lost lot ofversions again

Rob Withers reefedjib at gmail.com
Tue May 17 16:34:46 CEST 2011


Why don't you all write a git client in Pharo?  Then you could use github as 
the shared repository.  Monticello packages could be the git projects. You 
could define git sub-modules to support dependencies to other projects.





-----Original Message----- 
From: Igor Stasenko
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2011 10:19 AM
To: Pharo-project at lists.gforge.inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] I give up. Squeaksource has lost lot ofversions 
again

On 17 May 2011 15:57,  <csrabak at bol.com.br> wrote:
> Em 17/05/2011 10:32, Stéphane Ducasse < stephane.ducasse at inria.fr > 
> escreveu:
>
>> >> Now  this  is  why  ESUG  payed objectFusion  to  propose  a  new
>> >> application.
>> >>
>> >  Is there a  plan to provide a migration  from squeaksource to new
>> > system?  Because  if not, then  i'm afraid, most people  will keep
>> > using SqS and imagine how  many configs/wiki pages and other stuff
>> > needs to be updated.
>>  not that I  know.  I would give a certain amount  of time to people
>> to migrate (with their own little  fingers) put all the mcz on a ftp
>> somewhere close squeaksource
>
> Given you're being assertive about this, I think it's time to add up
> to Igor's stance:
>
>> > I'd  prefer to  fully  replace SqS  with  new system  at some  day
>> > without need of migrating  projects by all developers and updating
>> > links/configs etc.
>
> Expecting a disparate set of developers with different agendas and
> different priorities "to migrate (with their own little  fingers)" is
> putting too much faith the new system would be _sohhh_ _goooood_ that
> the masses will feel compelled to.
>

well comparing to more and more frequent down times, and a data loss..
i think a system which prove to be at least twice stable than current
will be a big advantage.
But you will never know before you try.

And again: who maintaining squeaksource? Nobody.
And now ask yourself: how you will manage your risks in such situation?

Will you prefer, maybe a bit flaky system, which has a maintainer who
will eventually fix all issues,
or a system which "lets hope it will works a bit more" and nobody who
are maintaining it?

I don't expect that new stuff will be _sohhh_ _goooood_  out of the
box. What i do expect however, that new system will be actively
maintained.
Otherwise if we don't have such guarantees then i don't see reason do
migrate at all, because couple years later we will be in same
situation: having problems but nobody to address them.

> my 0.019999...
>
> --
> Cesar Rabak
>


-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.




More information about the Pharo-project mailing list