Hi, On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 8:34 AM, Thierry Goubier <[email protected]> wrote:
> Le 04/10/2014 08:14, Tudor Girba a écrit : > >> Hi Thierry, >> >> On Sat, Oct 4, 2014 at 12:03 AM, Thierry Goubier >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> [...] >> And now, to make integration easier, we pile more stuff on top of >> the existing, bound to be removed, infrastructure: Glamour, Rubric, >> etc... And both Glamour and Spec don't make it easy to solve Morphic >> bugs. >> >> I value your ambition a lot :) But I also feel that it stresses the >> Rmod team, and it leaks over the community. >> >> >> I believe there is a confusion here. GT and Glamour are not maintained >> by the RMoD team. GT is an external project and it is maintained in its >> separate repository. That is why it stresses RMoD less and it is a way >> of scaling. >> > > I agree that the GT Tools are a bit different. Still, TxText integration > will have to work on all users of all forms of text, including GT (and > additionally GT). > Yes. That will become a priority once we address the current issues with GTInspector/Playground. > And now you are starting to have the issue of handling slices on GT from > Pharo: do people have to register on Moose, resynchronize on GT on Moose, > push their slices there, wait for Moose to push a slice to integrate on > Pharo, wait for Pharo to integrate that slice? Something like that. Only there is no wait time to integrate in Moose as GT is a standalone project, and Moose simply integrates the latest development version of all its dependencies. So, there is not that much difference to integrating in Pharo. Once a new stable version of GT is available, it will automatically be available in Pharo. > Also, since more than one year I am working on fixing various Morphic >> problems, and I can tell you that GT provides a significant productivity >> boost in that specific area. In any case, you should also note that >> these tools are under development since several years (the overall >> project started 5 years ago) and they are being actively used since 2 >> years in Moose. I believe we never had that much focus on the tools >> before. >> > > I found that stepping through the opening sequence of GT to debug > MorphTreeMorph a pain and had to find another way to understand the issue. Can you be more specific? What did you try to achieve and did not manage? > I do have specific tools I can use in such circumstances that you don't > have. > What kind of tools? I would be interested in learning about them and the analysis use cases they support. > I agree that Morphic has improved due to the fact GT is exposing it in > different ways (and you solving bugs in there), and that you are > integrating Alain's work (Rubric) in advance. I'm not worried by GT per se > (see above for the contribution things), but by the fact core elements > (Athens, TxText, NativeBoost, git) are a long way from stabilising. > I think the way is not that long. But, I am an optimist. Let's see :) Cheers, Doru > Thierry > > >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com> >> >> "Every thing has its own flow" >> > > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
