I understand your point.
But I do not have a measure for self-contained system and without crap.
So keeping the fonts is important to avoid to rely on a lot of
external software.
So to me it makes sense to keep and improve the existing while at the
same time
use other when it makes sense but not to the point that self contained
is damaged.
Stef
On Oct 21, 2008, at 10:20 AM, Antony Blakey wrote:
On 21/10/2008, at 5:43 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
for the vision behind pharo
imagine all the implications behind
• Better for the better
• Beauty to learn from
• Not backward compatible
• Clean, lean and fast
We want a system in which
- we can plug different UI frameworks
- clean network, clean file system, clean fonts, clean events,
clean compiler...
- that we could bootstrap: this is one of the goal also
- with robust software engineering practices (packages with
documentation, tests, smalllint rules attached).
But 'imagining implications' isn't really useful as objective input
into decision making, or anything that you can measure progress, or
even success against. I'll just point to the decision about FreeType
- where are the goals/constraints from which that decision follows?
Anyway, I'm not trying to piss anyone off, so I'll bow out of this
discussion.
Antony Blakey
-------------
CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd
Ph: 0438 840 787
The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of
comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge
and controversy.
-- Martin Luther King
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
