On 8 August 2013 09:05, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Aug 7, 2013, at 8:44 PM, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Well, my intent was to keep working together on it and be as open as >> possible to >> people who may not work particularly on Pharo, but care/use Cog. >> >> >> Now my dilemma is, what is the fate of Cog tracker? >> >> On 7 August 2013 20:29, Guillermo Polito <[email protected]> wrote: >>> I think that's not true at all. >>> >>> Our git repo and our vmmaker repo are used to build only the pharo vm >>> flavor. If we make a fix it does not get magically integrated into eliots >>> cog. >>> >> >> Guillermo , it is not 'our' and never been. It belongs to community, >> and Pharo is just part of it. >> I had hard time convincing people to join and use git and tracker.. >> Now this move puts a big cross on all these efforts. >> >> >> Of course i understand the benefits of having everything at one place. >> And of course we (as Pharo team) are free to organize own work in a >> way we see fit. > > indeed but do not see the devil everywhere > why putting the issue on a public tracker means private? >
well, perhaps then someone should communicate to me (and others) in detail, what it is about? and perhaps such actions should be communicated before doing? >> But i don't think we will find understanding if we start privatizing >> things which are not belong to us. >> Because initially this stuff was created without intent to be >> 'pharo-only' or for 'pharo-only'. > > > You see that clement is implementing clean blocks and that eliot wants to > integrate his work in COG. > > > Stef > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
