Will there be any interest in alternative declarative framework, mostly
fleshed out, worked in Pharo 2.0 / with little fixes for FileDirectory et
als in 3.0

http://skrishnamachari.wordpress.com/2012/01/31/pharo-application-framework-aka-morphic-view-framework/

I can push this in with the required MIT license sign off as reqd.

More importantly, move this framework to a more refactored cleaner state if
there is a slight interest in alternatives.



On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 5:51 PM, [email protected] <[email protected]>
wrote:

> No, it doesn't.
>
> We can improve Spec in the core, why wouldn't we be able to?
> We use it in a lot of the tools, so, there are plenty of samples and
> documentation exists.
>
> One can make sense of what's going on under the hood.
>
> Have a look at: (this is for Pharo 3.0)
>
> SpecInterpreter>>interpretASpec:selector: and ComposableModel +
> NewValueHolder.
> WindowModel is interesting to look into as well.
>
> The "famous" NewValueHolder is of interest too.
>
>
> then implementors of defaultSpec provide a lot of specs to give to the
> SpecInterpreter.
>
> Then one wants to look into the Spec-MorphicAdapters to see how Spec maps
> its view on things with underlying Morphs (e.g. check the
> MorphicDiffAdapter).
>
> We can only benefit by caring about this piece on our side, as there is
> tremendous potential in being able to change the underlying system (e.g.
> from Morphic to Bloc for example) in a piecemeal way, without breaking all
> of the tools.
>
> Phil
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Henrik Johansen <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Does it really matter?
>> If the external repository gets successfully relicensed, or Benjamin
>> publishes new improvements as a separate, GPL-licensed change set, the end
>> result is the same;
>> no improvement he makes will make its way back into the versions in Core.
>>
>> I may not know his reasons, but I can certainly respect his wish that no
>> further contributions are included in a core distribution.
>>
>> Whether to maintain/improve the current, MIT-licensed versions in Core
>> without him, or unload it all and point potential users to the external
>> library, is a separate decision.
>> Though, from previous attempts, I’d say the chances of success of an
>> external UI-builder framework seeing actual use are rather slim.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Henry
>>
>> On 28 Aug 2014, at 12:16 , Stephan Eggermont <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> https://github.com/spec-framework/spec/commit/07ea83ca50523b4a912e363ff2f3974c69314b7f#commitcomment-7540588
>> >
>> > I think the license might need further improvements.
>> > I've taken a look at the commit history, and  it looks
>> > to me like there is a licensing problem there.
>> > I am no lawyer, so don't know what the
>> > exact consequences of that are.
>> >
>> > The (MIT licensed) Pharo code was copied
>> > to the repository without including the copyright
>> > notice, as is required by the MIT license.
>> >
>> > For new contributions, you now have the
>> > license agreements, and with git it is
>> > perfectly clear what is new, and under
>> > the new license, and what is old, and
>> > can therefore also be used under the
>> > old license. And AFAIK MIT license
>> > is compatible with GPL.
>> >
>> > I have no clue as to the license status of
>> > changes between the copying and the
>> > relicensing.
>> >
>> > Of course copyright holding contributors can
>> > decide to relicense. The contributors to the
>> > Spec-* packages in the Pharo/Pharo30 repo
>> > seem to be:
>> >
>> > AlainPlantec
>> > AndreiChis
>> > BenComan
>> > BenjaminVanRyseghem
>> > BernardoContreras
>> > CamilloBruni
>> > CamilleTeruel
>> > ChristopheDemarey
>> > ClementBera
>> > DamienCassou
>> > ErwanDouaille
>> > EstebanLorenzano
>> > GabrielOmarCotelli
>> > GuillermoPolito
>> > HernanMoralesDurand
>> > IgorStasenko
>> > LeoGassman
>> > MarcusDenker
>> > MartinDias
>> > NicolaiHess
>> > PabloHerrero
>> > PavelKrivanek
>> > PhilippeBack
>> > RobertoMinelli
>> > SeanDeNigris
>> > SebastianTleye
>> > StephaneDucasse
>> > SvenVanCaekenberghe
>> > TorstenBergmann
>> > TudorGirba
>> > YuriyTymchuk
>> >
>> > Stephan
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to