> Am 24.11.2013 um 21:08 schrieb "[email protected]" <[email protected]>: > > This makes think of the tick tock model of Intel improvements. > > http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/silicon-innovations/intel-tick-tock-model-general.html > > Looks like with 2.0 and 3.0 we are going to have two "tick"s in a row. That > may be too much. > > I am afraid even trying out 3.0 when reading about all the moving parts that > are changing in all corners.
Yep, me too. But then I think it can't be worse than 2.0 :) We have to live with that. There won't be a matured image version anytime soon so ... Norbert > > Phil > > > > --- > Philippe Back > Dramatic Performance Improvements > Mob: +32(0) 478 650 140 | Fax: +32 (0) 70 408 027 > Mail:[email protected] | Web: http://philippeback.eu > Blog: http://philippeback.be | Twitter: @philippeback > Youtube: http://www.youtube.com/user/philippeback/videos > > High Octane SPRL > rue cour Boisacq 101 | 1301 Bierges | Belgium > > Pharo Consortium Member - http://consortium.pharo.org/ > Featured on the Software Process and Measurement Cast - > http://spamcast.libsyn.com > Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect and Ability Engineering EADocX Value Added > Reseller > > > > >> On Sun, Nov 24, 2013 at 9:02 PM, Stéphane Ducasse >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> Hi guys >> >> It would be good not to clean without a clear vision. >> For example we cannot register an old browser to browse code via the menu of >> a window. >> Now let us think two minutes to see if you can get my point: >> >> - I want to unload nautilus, rb, keymapping, athens, Ecompletion, >> Gofer, NativeBoost, Zinc, ….. >> and reload them via their configuration so that we can manage Pharo >> with configurations. >> >> - Right now we LOST yes LOST the configurations of most of the part >> of the systems (I just spendt several afternoon >> on the one of RB in the past and now guess what) because >> we do not have a process to use them and we are afraid to have 10 >> packages and 10 classes more in the system. >> I do not understand why we do not start to put the configuration >> inside the image. To me this is totally stupid >> not to do it. >> >> - Now without a browser this is nearly impossible to work. So we >> will remove the old browser >> but we should go slowly because else I will you do it with emacs >> outside the image to see if you succeed. >> >> So it would be good to focus on real impacting changes. >> >> Stef >
