Goubier Thierry wrote > Le 06/09/2013 14:13, Marcus Denker a écrit : >> So you want more change in 2.0? You can have that, but you need to >> accept instability. There is no way to have both more changes and more >> stability. > > I'm OK for that. 3.0 is just plainly too unstable, and this is the way > it should be. But 2.0 shouldn't be considered a dead platform ;)
I feel the same pain and was motivated enough to create my special interim version mentioned above. And, having previously backported autocompletion (for 1.4 iirc), I can verify that backporting requires significant manpower. I introduced bugs which I then felt compelled to spend many hours fixing (instead of working) because I had broken production software. Given our massive vision, I feel that manpower is better spent moving forward. And I am willing to deal with the pain of feeling one step behind development if it gets us to the system of our dreams. ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/OSProcess-for-Pharo3-0-tp4706087p4707036.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
