[Pharo-project] [Seaside] Re: [Metacello] What is the plan with Pharo changes?

Dale Henrichs dhenrich at vmware.com
Sat Aug 4 18:02:43 CEST 2012


Stef,

That would be fine with me ... 

That would buy time for me to come up with a port to 2.0 that satisfies my need for portability and allows you guys to keep forging ahead without being dragged back by me:)

Dale
----- Original Message -----
| From: "Stéphane Ducasse" <stephane.ducasse at inria.fr>
| To: Pharo-project at lists.gforge.inria.fr
| Sent: Friday, August 3, 2012 11:54:24 PM
| Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] [Seaside] Re: [Metacello] What is the plan with	Pharo changes?
| 
| Dale
| 
| Can we use an old version of Metacello that we maintain?
| Then we migrate when needed and this is ok.
| 
| Stef
| 
| 
| > | > What I'd _like_ to do for Metacello and Pharo-2.0 is to make
| > | > the
| > | > changes against the MetacelloPreview release, which I'm
| > | > managing
| > | > on github.
| > | >
| > | > The MetacelloPreview is aimed at an eventual 1.0 release of
| > | > Metacello (hopefully in the fall).
| > | >
| > | > I would _like_ Metacello-Base to be included in the Pharo-2.0
| > | > base
| > | > image, the sooner the better and I'm poised to pull the trigger
| > | > on
| > | > that, but the recent changes have crippled FileTree ...
| > | >
| > | yeah.. we talking about it all the time "how good it would be to
| > | have
| > | metacello preloaded in image" :)
| > | 
| > | > So until FileTree is functional again, I can't really do
| > | > anything
| > | > with Pharo-2.0...
| > | >
| > | > Hacking Metacello to get it running on Pharo-2.0 doesn't help
| > | > _me_
| > | > move forward.
| > | >
| > | 
| > | You can tell  how they could help, so they will (if they will
| > | still
| > | want), leaving less work for you :) Of course, if you need help
| > | or
| > | can
| > | see where it can be useful.
| > | But i know it is hard to coordinate & organize activities..
| > | sometimes
| > | harder than doing everything alone. :)
| > 
| > The bigger problem is that I have to have a code base that runs on
| > multiple platforms while being maintainable, so a "port" to
| > Pharo-2.0 is only a starting point. In the case of FileTree, which
| > is the real bottleneck there's a lot code that is written against
| > the FileDirectory API, so there will need to be significant work
| > to find a way to keep a common code base .... a much tougher
| > problem, than "just getting it working", it can be solved with
| > time, but I didn't budget time for an emergency rewrite of
| > FileTree ... today.
| > 
| > | 
| > | > It is likely that I will have to redo whatever hacks that are
| > | > done
| > | > to get it running on Pharo-2.0 to be compatible with the rest
| > | > of
| > | > platforms that I am supporting and doing it right takes a
| > | > little
| > | > more effort ...
| > | >
| > | yes.. it is hard to keep up with moving target.. But i hope this
| > | is
| > | for good of us all (FileSystem ,as to me, is no doubt much better
| > | comparing to what we had before).
| > 
| > Oh don't get me wrong, I agree with the overall goals ... I
| > actually think that renaming FileDirectory to
| > ObsoleteFileDirectory (and keeping the implementation) would be a
| > good compromise ... I can easily switch class names for the short
| > term which then buys me time for doing a proper rewrite ...
| > 
| > | 
| > | > So if you are just going to hack around to get things running
| > | > on
| > | > Pharo-2.0 I guess I would have to say that I don't care what
| > | > you
| > | > do, because the hacks don't make my job any easier.
| > | >
| > | > Dale
| > | >
| > | 
| > | --
| > | Best regards,
| > | Igor Stasenko.
| > | _______________________________________________
| > | seaside mailing list
| > | seaside at lists.squeakfoundation.org
| > | http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
| > | 
| > 
| 
| 
| 



More information about the Pharo-project mailing list