Am 06.02.15 12:43, schrieb Sean P. DeNigris:
Markus Fritsche-4 wrote
+1 to that one.
Yes, I also find it difficult - much more so when I was new to the
community, but even still a bit now. Coral, Zinc, Seaside, Opal - may be
catchy, but when I'm browsing the system, I just want to see where the darn
WebClient is, not mine for minerals or go to the beach!! ;) j/k. But
+1
The names of these frameworks are nice as long as they are outside the
image.
Inside the image the focus should be on functionality (at least as long
as the frameworks are unique).
For somebody new to Pharo this is quite irritating.
Andreas
seriously, it's one thing to have "sexy" names at the top level - Pharo,
Squeak, Ruby, Python; but inside the system, it definitely creates
confusion. It's perhaps extra difficult for us because some of these
projects have both an outside and inside identity. It's an interesting open
problem... maybe some metadata at the MetaC/package level could help? Like
some standard tags like #WebClient, #Compiler, etc to say logically what
role a project fills...
-----
Cheers,
Sean
--
View this message in context:
http://forum.world.st/Switching-to-Pharo-from-Visualworks-tp4803811p4804142.html
Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
