Begin forwarded message:
> From: Keith Hodges <[email protected]> > Date: February 12, 2009 2:38:41 PM CEST > To: Alexandre Bergel <[email protected]>, stephane ducasse > <[email protected] > > > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Workspace API > > Alexandre Bergel wrote: >> Hi Keith, >> >> I am close enough to Stef to affirm you that he respects your work >> and >> he is really willing to have a look at your code. As I do. I said >> that >> I would look at your SUnit extension a long while ago. However Stef >> and I are extremely busy. We are leading a group of 8 people, which >> suck up all our time. Really. >> >> Regards, >> Alexandre > Why do you need to look at my code? I am not speaking up because you > are > not gathering up my meagre useless coding crumbs. > > The argument is not about code its about perspective and philosophy. > > MC1.5 is a loadable tool it either works or it doesn't. If it doesn't > then the way forward is to consider contributing to the MC1.5 effort > to > make it work. That is the philosophy choice, inclusive or exclusive. > > Will you make the philosophy choice to treat MC as a community project > or your project, which is it to be? That choice takes no time at all > to > make. You make the choice and then you can put your time and effort > into > working with the consequences. > > I am concerned because your philosophy leads you to continue to fork > stuff that doesn't need to be forked and should not be forked for the > good of the community. > > Another trivial example: Workspace is another tool, it could be > loadable, it need not be part of the kernel. > Variants of Workspace could be available. Whatever is done it could be > loadable and work in all images. There is no reason at all why my old > production image that is still in 3.8 cant load a newer implementation > of Workspace (since ScriptManager loads successfully) > > SUnit is a loadable framework it is something that should be managed > as > a resource for everyone. Why does the pharo team insist on controlling > it and forking. I am not asking you to "look at my code" in SUnit. In > fact I doubt that the filters are actually working at the moment. Some > of my code in SUnit was really rubbish until recent improvements. > > I am asking you to adopt a philosophy of seeing > MC/SUnit/Workspace/Compiler/Collections etc as a community resource, > with a repository squeaksource/Testing that the community maintains. > Not > something that pharo does its own thing on. > > If you dont, then I cant write a package that loads into Squeak and > Pharo (because MC wont necessarily be compatible) or Tests run in > squeak > and Pharo (because SUnit will be incompatible). Why don't you see > this > level of compatibility as important? > > So again I am not complaining about the fact that you haven't looked > at > this or that bit of code. Your response of "we havent had time to look > at that " winds me up, because I hear it as "we havent had time to > audit > your potentially inferior code that might be below us to use." and > that > very attitude misses the point completely. > > All of Stef objections, demonstrate that this is how he sees it. > > I am complaining that you see the issue as a bunch of "potentially > inferior" code contributions to your cause, rather than "we have > something to contribute to the community of SUnit and MC users, > because > MC and SUnit are frameworks that everyone uses and depends on." > > regards > > Keith > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
