changed the subject :-) Michael
On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 11:52 PM, Michael Roberts <[email protected]> wrote: > I just wanted to add that I agree the change is currently at the wrong > level. Whilst the change was done with the best intentions, and in > the best spirit of what Pharo is trying to be, the impact on the user > was not obvious until it was live. I wanted to load the cryptography > package so that I could play with the Amazon cloud stuff. I get > exactly the same warning and it is a disruption. I agree with the > thread that said this should be a code critic rule, and / or there is > some control over when the warnings are raised. I also saw that Doru > was having issues with it as well in another thread. I'm all for > change, but in this case we need to be more sophisticated about it. > > thanks, > Mike > > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 9:48 AM, Stéphane Ducasse > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Ok >> >>>> >>> Lets discuss this monday. >> >> :) >> >>> I am not against change, but this chagne is *at the wrong level*. >>> >>> I don't want RB Lint to do the check in the browser (maybe later), >>> it can be done just the same it is now done in the classbuilder, just >>> in the browser. That's where we want it, as it talks to the user. >> >> Why not then. >> My gut feeling is that we should have LARGE warning when also saving >> or loading code. >> Consistency can be a good thing >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
