Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping OB conflict (was Re: Chasing Browsers)

2011-12-12 Thread Stéphane Ducasse
All the compilation chain and code management and manipulation tools should be 
able to work on remote environment. 
We already discussed and I do not have the time to explain that the design of 
john was not taking into account that 
we would like to be able to work with one tool on another environment. The 
Browser environment = the complete code in the image
does not work anymore. Anyway you do not want to change and this is perfect. 
It is just raging that I do not have enough time to fix it.

Now we will see in 1.4 if people want to still use 1.3 or if they have benefit 
to work with 1.4.
We integrated RB because we need to be able to move forward. It would be easy 
to have two configurations one for 1.3 and one for 1.4
but since you do not want to maintain it when you change your versions then we 
have to spend more time and frustration 
but we will do it. I spent a full day the last time while it would have cost 
you may be 10 min but I have no problem with that since
the only thing I can do is to do it, I will do it. 

We will continue to work and push pharo and people can continue to use it or 
not. We know where we want to go 
and we will take responsibility and probably it will burn a bit more of our 
energy but there is no other paths sadly.

Stef

On Dec 11, 2011, at 4:42 PM, Lukas Renggli wrote:

 This is important for us to know that and this is a really nice stab
 in our back and this will kill a lot of the effort we build over the years.
 
 I don't understand why you think this is a stab into your back? I have
 repeated the same concerns over and over again.
 
 Now how can we make progress if we do not change Pharo?
 
 Again, we already discussed this many times. I think Pharo is totally
 off the track: Pharo should concentrate on getting a stable core and
 enabling distributions on top, not on integrating as much new things
 as possible.
 
 May be a dead pharo is better for you.
 
 A dead Pharo is not my goal. I need a minimal Pharo with an absolutely
 trusted and stable core; a system where I can load all my code; a
 system that does not force me to use things I don't want to use.
 
 @Lukas: please, could you point out what are the expected problems?
 For example, all PetitParser-Tests are green out of the box in the latest 
 1.4.
 
 Nice, maybe the others also just work?
 
 OB does not work though because Polymorph changed (and the debugger
 doesn't even open in the UI thread anymore either, so it is not
 possible to figure out the problem); and because it expects a
 different version of RB.
 
 You were against changing RB, so how can we do remote tooling?
 
 I was against chaining RB, because the proposed changes undermined
 design decisions in RB. In general, it feels extremely strange to me
 if people change code (or even class comments) without understanding
 the code.
 
 Also, for that matter, I don't see how you want to use RB for remote
 tooling? If you remember, I pointed out an interview a while ago with
 John where they discuss why remote tooling wouldn't work without
 rewriting most parts.
 
 Lukas
 
 -- 
 Lukas Renggli
 www.lukas-renggli.ch
 




Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping OB conflict (was Re: Chasing Browsers)

2011-12-12 Thread Stéphane Ducasse
 
 
 Now how can we make progress if we do not change Pharo?
 
 Again, we already discussed this many times. I think Pharo is totally
 off the track: Pharo should concentrate on getting a stable core and
 enabling distributions on top, not on integrating as much new things
 as possible.

How can we remove from the kernel the ugly browser classes and tools, if
people do not support the new tools?
How can we redo senders and implementors (fix the ugly listMorph treemorph)
 when we cannot maintain OB (because we do not understand it)?

So we are probably not so off-track that you believe. It will take more time
that if people would collaborate with us, but we will get there.

Ok so this is my last mail on that topic. I lost already too much energy that I 
should have
spent on 1.4.

Stef






Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping OB conflict (was Re: Chasing Browsers)

2011-12-11 Thread Stéphane Ducasse
What I would like to see happening is that 
- keymapping is used / integrated in Pharo 1.4
- then that OB can be loaded on top of Pharo. Remember we are not 
against OB we just do not have 
the knowledge to maintain it. So if lukas gets OB working for 1.4 beta 
then we will probably include in Pharo.
Now if OB is working for 1.4 only three months after 1.4 is released 
then we will not include it.

Stef

On Dec 10, 2011, at 11:13 PM, Guillermo Polito wrote:

 Hmm, I'll have a brief look to avoid keymapping to conflict with OB between 
 today and tuesday.
 
 I don't think it makes sense to spend any time integrating it with OB (yet) 
 since it's removed from Pharo 1.4.
 
 Guille
 
 On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Lukas Renggli reng...@gmail.com wrote:
 Ok, then it must be something else.
 
 I don't know why this Keymapping thing, but it is unlikely to work
 with OB if it was not written for OB. As I said, OB managed its
 keybindings itself.
 
 Lukas
 
 On 5 December 2011 03:51, Sean P. DeNigris s...@clipperadams.com wrote:
 
 Lukas Renggli wrote
 
 OB. This means, if you select the method and press Cmd+n it should
 
 
 Bummer, Cmd-n with a method name selected in OB system browser still brings
 up the non-chasing senders browser.
 
 --
 View this message in context: 
 http://forum.world.st/Chasing-Browsers-tp4102608p4159064.html
 Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
 
 
 
 
 --
 Lukas Renggli
 www.lukas-renggli.ch
 
 




Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping OB conflict (was Re: Chasing Browsers)

2011-12-11 Thread Lukas Renggli
 - then that OB can be loaded on top of Pharo. Remember we are not against OB 
we just do not have
   the knowledge to maintain it. So if lukas gets OB working for 1.4 beta then 
we will probably include in Pharo.
   Now if OB is working for 1.4 only three months after 1.4 is released then 
we will not include it.

Yes please, do not wait for me.

Just to repeat myself: With Pharo 1.4 having uncountable changes in
core parts of the system and with the system including more and more
forked and increasingly incompatible versions of packages (AST, RB,
FS, Shout, Regex, ...) I am unwilling to go through the same pain as
with Pharo 1.3 again. In the current state, I don't see any of the
code I am involved with (including Seaside, Magritte, Pier, OB,
PetitParser, ...) to move forward. I suspect that moving to another
development platform soon causes less pain than to move to adopt the
next Pharo :-(

Lukas

-- 
Lukas Renggli
www.lukas-renggli.ch



Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping OB conflict (was Re: Chasing Browsers)

2011-12-11 Thread Stéphane Ducasse
Lukas I really think that you are exaggerating. 
Now how can we make progress if we do not change Pharo?

You were against changing RB, so how can we do remote tooling?
Alain fixed a lot of the problems of 1.3.

I think that your bad energy will damage us and I'm immensely sad.

May be a dead pharo is better for you.

Stef

  - then that OB can be loaded on top of Pharo. Remember we are not against 
 OB we just do not have
the knowledge to maintain it. So if lukas gets OB working for 1.4 beta 
 then we will probably include in Pharo.
Now if OB is working for 1.4 only three months after 1.4 is released then 
 we will not include it.
 
 Yes please, do not wait for me.
 
 Just to repeat myself: With Pharo 1.4 having uncountable changes in
 core parts of the system and with the system including more and more
 forked and increasingly incompatible versions of packages (AST, RB,
 FS, Shout, Regex, ...) I am unwilling to go through the same pain as
 with Pharo 1.3 again. In the current state, I don't see any of the
 code I am involved with (including Seaside, Magritte, Pier, OB,
 PetitParser, ...) to move forward. I suspect that moving to another
 development platform soon causes less pain than to move to adopt the
 next Pharo :-(
 
 Lukas
 
 -- 
 Lukas Renggli
 www.lukas-renggli.ch
 




Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping OB conflict (was Re: Chasing Browsers)

2011-12-11 Thread Stéphane Ducasse
Thanks for this really bad and sad message.
So you are implying that Seaside, Magritte, Pier, OB, PetitParser
will not be maintained on Pharo 1.4.

This is important for us to know that and this is a really nice stab in our 
back and this will kill 
a lot of the effort we build over the years.

Thanks again lukas!
At least this is clear. 

Stef

On Dec 11, 2011, at 12:33 PM, Lukas Renggli wrote:

  - then that OB can be loaded on top of Pharo. Remember we are not against 
 OB we just do not have
the knowledge to maintain it. So if lukas gets OB working for 1.4 beta 
 then we will probably include in Pharo.
Now if OB is working for 1.4 only three months after 1.4 is released then 
 we will not include it.
 
 Yes please, do not wait for me.
 
 Just to repeat myself: With Pharo 1.4 having uncountable changes in
 core parts of the system and with the system including more and more
 forked and increasingly incompatible versions of packages (AST, RB,
 FS, Shout, Regex, ...) I am unwilling to go through the same pain as
 with Pharo 1.3 again. In the current state, I don't see any of the
 code I am involved with (including Seaside, Magritte, Pier, OB,
 PetitParser, ...) to move forward. I suspect that moving to another
 development platform soon causes less pain than to move to adopt the
 next Pharo :-(
 
 Lukas
 
 -- 
 Lukas Renggli
 www.lukas-renggli.ch
 




Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping OB conflict (was Re: Chasing Browsers)

2011-12-11 Thread Tudor Girba
Hello gentlemen,

Let's loosen up a bit, please :).

These are important pieces that nobody wants to see remain behind. But, before 
we go on, we should first identify the root of these concerns.

@Lukas: please, could you point out what are the expected problems?
For example, all PetitParser-Tests are green out of the box in the latest 1.4.

Cheers,
Doru


On 11 Dec 2011, at 14:58, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:

 Thanks for this really bad and sad message.
 So you are implying that Seaside, Magritte, Pier, OB, PetitParser
 will not be maintained on Pharo 1.4.
 
 This is important for us to know that and this is a really nice stab in our 
 back and this will kill 
 a lot of the effort we build over the years.
 
 Thanks again lukas!
 At least this is clear. 
 
 Stef
 
 On Dec 11, 2011, at 12:33 PM, Lukas Renggli wrote:
 
 - then that OB can be loaded on top of Pharo. Remember we are not against 
 OB we just do not have
   the knowledge to maintain it. So if lukas gets OB working for 1.4 beta 
 then we will probably include in Pharo.
   Now if OB is working for 1.4 only three months after 1.4 is released then 
 we will not include it.
 
 Yes please, do not wait for me.
 
 Just to repeat myself: With Pharo 1.4 having uncountable changes in
 core parts of the system and with the system including more and more
 forked and increasingly incompatible versions of packages (AST, RB,
 FS, Shout, Regex, ...) I am unwilling to go through the same pain as
 with Pharo 1.3 again. In the current state, I don't see any of the
 code I am involved with (including Seaside, Magritte, Pier, OB,
 PetitParser, ...) to move forward. I suspect that moving to another
 development platform soon causes less pain than to move to adopt the
 next Pharo :-(
 
 Lukas
 
 -- 
 Lukas Renggli
 www.lukas-renggli.ch
 
 
 

--
www.tudorgirba.com

We cannot reach the flow of things unless we let go.






Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping OB conflict (was Re: Chasing Browsers)

2011-12-11 Thread Esteban Lorenzano
Hi Lukas, 

I just loaded Magritte2 into Pharo 1.4 and it loads well with all tests in 
green. 
Also, Magritte-Morph loads and seems to run well... just a small change: 

replace: 

PluggableListMorphOfMany 

with:

PluggableListMorph ...
beMultipleSelection
 
(now, I want to deprecate #description for #magritteDescription and add a 
pragma builder with magritte and magritteContainer keywords :)

cheers,
Esteban

El 11/12/2011, a las 10:58a.m., Stéphane Ducasse escribió:

 Thanks for this really bad and sad message.
 So you are implying that Seaside, Magritte, Pier, OB, PetitParser
 will not be maintained on Pharo 1.4.
 
 This is important for us to know that and this is a really nice stab in our 
 back and this will kill 
 a lot of the effort we build over the years.
 
 Thanks again lukas!
 At least this is clear. 
 
 Stef
 
 On Dec 11, 2011, at 12:33 PM, Lukas Renggli wrote:
 
 - then that OB can be loaded on top of Pharo. Remember we are not against 
 OB we just do not have
   the knowledge to maintain it. So if lukas gets OB working for 1.4 beta 
 then we will probably include in Pharo.
   Now if OB is working for 1.4 only three months after 1.4 is released then 
 we will not include it.
 
 Yes please, do not wait for me.
 
 Just to repeat myself: With Pharo 1.4 having uncountable changes in
 core parts of the system and with the system including more and more
 forked and increasingly incompatible versions of packages (AST, RB,
 FS, Shout, Regex, ...) I am unwilling to go through the same pain as
 with Pharo 1.3 again. In the current state, I don't see any of the
 code I am involved with (including Seaside, Magritte, Pier, OB,
 PetitParser, ...) to move forward. I suspect that moving to another
 development platform soon causes less pain than to move to adopt the
 next Pharo :-(
 
 Lukas
 
 -- 
 Lukas Renggli
 www.lukas-renggli.ch
 
 
 




Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping OB conflict (was Re: Chasing Browsers)

2011-12-11 Thread Tudor Girba
Hi,

On 11 Dec 2011, at 15:49, Esteban Lorenzano wrote:

 Hi Lukas, 
 
 I just loaded Magritte2 into Pharo 1.4 and it loads well with all tests in 
 green. 
 Also, Magritte-Morph loads and seems to run well... just a small change: 
 
 replace: 
 
 PluggableListMorphOfMany 
 
 with:
 
 PluggableListMorph ...
   beMultipleSelection

Thanks for looking into this :).

 (now, I want to deprecate #description for #magritteDescription and add a 
 pragma builder with magritte and magritteContainer keywords :)

I think that would be most welcome.

Cheers,
Doru



 cheers,
 Esteban
 
 El 11/12/2011, a las 10:58a.m., Stéphane Ducasse escribió:
 
 Thanks for this really bad and sad message.
 So you are implying that Seaside, Magritte, Pier, OB, PetitParser
 will not be maintained on Pharo 1.4.
 
 This is important for us to know that and this is a really nice stab in our 
 back and this will kill 
 a lot of the effort we build over the years.
 
 Thanks again lukas!
 At least this is clear. 
 
 Stef
 
 On Dec 11, 2011, at 12:33 PM, Lukas Renggli wrote:
 
 - then that OB can be loaded on top of Pharo. Remember we are not against 
 OB we just do not have
  the knowledge to maintain it. So if lukas gets OB working for 1.4 beta 
 then we will probably include in Pharo.
  Now if OB is working for 1.4 only three months after 1.4 is released then 
 we will not include it.
 
 Yes please, do not wait for me.
 
 Just to repeat myself: With Pharo 1.4 having uncountable changes in
 core parts of the system and with the system including more and more
 forked and increasingly incompatible versions of packages (AST, RB,
 FS, Shout, Regex, ...) I am unwilling to go through the same pain as
 with Pharo 1.3 again. In the current state, I don't see any of the
 code I am involved with (including Seaside, Magritte, Pier, OB,
 PetitParser, ...) to move forward. I suspect that moving to another
 development platform soon causes less pain than to move to adopt the
 next Pharo :-(
 
 Lukas
 
 -- 
 Lukas Renggli
 www.lukas-renggli.ch
 
 
 
 
 

--
www.tudorgirba.com

Quality cannot be an afterthought.




Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping OB conflict (was Re: Chasing Browsers)

2011-12-11 Thread Lukas Renggli
 This is important for us to know that and this is a really nice stab
 in our back and this will kill a lot of the effort we build over the years.

I don't understand why you think this is a stab into your back? I have
repeated the same concerns over and over again.

 Now how can we make progress if we do not change Pharo?

Again, we already discussed this many times. I think Pharo is totally
off the track: Pharo should concentrate on getting a stable core and
enabling distributions on top, not on integrating as much new things
as possible.

 May be a dead pharo is better for you.

A dead Pharo is not my goal. I need a minimal Pharo with an absolutely
trusted and stable core; a system where I can load all my code; a
system that does not force me to use things I don't want to use.

 @Lukas: please, could you point out what are the expected problems?
 For example, all PetitParser-Tests are green out of the box in the latest 1.4.

Nice, maybe the others also just work?

OB does not work though because Polymorph changed (and the debugger
doesn't even open in the UI thread anymore either, so it is not
possible to figure out the problem); and because it expects a
different version of RB.

 You were against changing RB, so how can we do remote tooling?

I was against chaining RB, because the proposed changes undermined
design decisions in RB. In general, it feels extremely strange to me
if people change code (or even class comments) without understanding
the code.

Also, for that matter, I don't see how you want to use RB for remote
tooling? If you remember, I pointed out an interview a while ago with
John where they discuss why remote tooling wouldn't work without
rewriting most parts.

Lukas

-- 
Lukas Renggli
www.lukas-renggli.ch



Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping OB conflict (was Re: Chasing Browsers)

2011-12-10 Thread Guillermo Polito
Hmm, I'll have a brief look to avoid keymapping to conflict with OB between
today and tuesday.

I don't think it makes sense to spend any time integrating it with OB (yet)
since it's removed from Pharo 1.4.

Guille

On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 3:32 AM, Lukas Renggli reng...@gmail.com wrote:

 Ok, then it must be something else.

 I don't know why this Keymapping thing, but it is unlikely to work
 with OB if it was not written for OB. As I said, OB managed its
 keybindings itself.

 Lukas

 On 5 December 2011 03:51, Sean P. DeNigris s...@clipperadams.com wrote:
 
  Lukas Renggli wrote
 
  OB. This means, if you select the method and press Cmd+n it should
 
 
  Bummer, Cmd-n with a method name selected in OB system browser still
 brings
  up the non-chasing senders browser.
 
  --
  View this message in context:
 http://forum.world.st/Chasing-Browsers-tp4102608p4159064.html
  Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
 



 --
 Lukas Renggli
 www.lukas-renggli.ch




Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping OB conflict (was Re: Chasing Browsers)

2011-12-05 Thread Lukas Renggli
Ok, then it must be something else.

I don't know why this Keymapping thing, but it is unlikely to work
with OB if it was not written for OB. As I said, OB managed its
keybindings itself.

Lukas

On 5 December 2011 03:51, Sean P. DeNigris s...@clipperadams.com wrote:

 Lukas Renggli wrote

 OB. This means, if you select the method and press Cmd+n it should


 Bummer, Cmd-n with a method name selected in OB system browser still brings
 up the non-chasing senders browser.

 --
 View this message in context: 
 http://forum.world.st/Chasing-Browsers-tp4102608p4159064.html
 Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.




-- 
Lukas Renggli
www.lukas-renggli.ch



Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping OB conflict (was Re: Chasing Browsers)

2011-12-04 Thread Lukas Renggli
 Maybe you use the wrong browser? AFAIK, only OB implements it.

 Ahh, thank you Lukas. It seems like a bug in Keymapping. What do you think,
 Guillermo?

Keymapping? I don't think that would work with OB that has its own
keymapping. The problem you observe is a long standing bug: if you
don't have a text selection key presses are handled by Pharo not by
OB. This means, if you select the method and press Cmd+n it should
work.

Lukas



 The situation:
  In 1.2.2, I get anOBSendersBrowser.

  However in 1.3 rc, from a method definition in OB:
    - if I choose Senders from the menu I get anOBSendersBrowser
    - but if I hit Cmd-n, I get a FlatMessageListBrowser.

 The call stack:
 - without key mapping:


 OBTextMorphkeyStroke:
 OBTextMorph(TextMorph)handleKeystroke:
 KeyboardEventsentTo:
 OBTextMorph(Morph)handleEvent:
 OBTextMorph(Morph)handleFocusEvent:
 [ActiveHand := self.
       ActiveEvent := anEvent.
       result := focusHolder
                               handleFocusEvent: (anEvent
                                               transformedBy: (focusHolder 
 transformedFrom: self))] in
 HandMorphsendFocusEvent:to:clear:


 - with Keymapping:


 SmalltalkEditorsendersOfIt
 SmalltalkEditorsendersOfIt:
 [editor sendersOfIt: event] in [:editor :morph :event | morph
               handleKeymappingInteraction: [editor sendersOfIt: event]
               fromKeyboardEvent: event] in KMEditorsDefaultSettings
 classbuildSmalltalkEditorKeymappingsOn:
 SmalltalkEditor(TextEditor)handleKeystrokeAction:
 SmalltalkEditor(TextEditor)handleEditionAction:fromKeyboardEvent:
 [self editor handleEditionAction: aBlockInteraction fromKeyboardEvent:
 anEvent] in
 OBTextMorph(TextMorph)handleKeymappingInteraction:fromKeyboardEvent:
 OBTextMorph(TextMorph)handleInteraction:
 OBTextMorph(TextMorphForEditView)handleInteraction:
 OBTextMorph(TextMorph)handleKeymappingInteraction:fromKeyboardEvent:
 [:editor :morph :event | morph
               handleKeymappingInteraction: [editor sendersOfIt: event]
               fromKeyboardEvent: event] in KMEditorsDefaultSettings
 classbuildSmalltalkEditorKeymappingsOn:


 --
 View this message in context: 
 http://forum.world.st/Chasing-Browsers-tp4102608p4157598.html
 Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.




-- 
Lukas Renggli
www.lukas-renggli.ch



Re: [Pharo-project] Keymapping OB conflict (was Re: Chasing Browsers)

2011-12-04 Thread Sean P. DeNigris

Lukas Renggli wrote
 
 OB. This means, if you select the method and press Cmd+n it should
 

Bummer, Cmd-n with a method name selected in OB system browser still brings
up the non-chasing senders browser.

--
View this message in context: 
http://forum.world.st/Chasing-Browsers-tp4102608p4159064.html
Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.