On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 7:12 AM, stepken <[email protected]> wrote: >> Pharo developers are few and limited. They are trying to do all of their >> best on Pharo. We know this an important package but perhaps they have more >> important things to do. Pharo is not even in a beta of first milestone. This >> can be planned in a future milestone. > > Hmmm. How many manyears were invested in Squeak? 1000, 2000? > > You have removed lots of code due to "license problems". See R.A. Harmon > code. What a pitty to throw away code ... >
Maybe for you license is just a bunch of words without meaning, somethink like the EULAs that windows has popularized to not read and click "Accept". For others, the license is the main factor to choose to use a technology. Don't assume that everyone just use everything that is "free as in beer, shareware, freeware, trial" and downloadable from the internet for professional (in terms of money paid by a client, not quality of code produced) work. > Do you really think, he really cares about his former code contribution to a > system, which from the beginning was free and open? > > Don't you think, every jugde would confirm, that such code contributions were > made in the sense of "giveaways"? > Big assumption. > I think you don't have a real understanding of what you have destroyed now. > Of course they have. It is stated in the about page of the pharo project, in the manifesto: Better for the better Beauty to learn from *Not backward compatible* Clean, lean and fast Towards a new generation of Smalltalk It requires a big courage to break with the past. That is the reason that is having so big complains and hurras. I personally, want a clean, core smalltalk that I can load *only* the packages from a *unique* central repository and use that image generated to deploy my apps. That is not currently possible with squeak, because of squeakmap, squeaksource, monticello repositories, sar, etc and because squeak comes loaded with everything and the kitchen sink. > Having rewritten array/colletions/streams code ... a bit shorter code now, > because of traits. Who really cares? > That require a more technical discussion before making assertions of utility. Check the squeak list for several discussions > You want to build a commercial platform to make money. Supported. Yes. > > Didn't you all Smalltalk Developers notice, that even Dolphin was close to > give up? They hat to find their new business model. And they also have a very > sophisticated *free* version. > Again, we don't just a "free as beer" version, we want a "free as in freedom". > GNU Smalltalk 3.0 ... fine thing, free, can run seaside, pier, .... what do i > need more? Free! > The license used by gnu smalltalk is tricky for me and in the end, if I have to choose between MIT or GPL or LGPL, I choose MIT. > Do you really hope to get one cent for supporting a free smalltalk platform? > The money is not a goal of the pharo project and if as a consecuence the authors can get money from support, that is very good. But, to me, that is no a problem. Same applies for red hat, linux, tomcat, jboss, postgres. The have the right to capitalize the technology. That is not in detrimental of the project. > I really appreciate your effords. There are things, that had to be done on > Squeak. Traits, 5th implemention of closures ... > > But ... you haven't included the old code contributors at Viewpoint Research > Institute, MIT (Scratch), HPI Berlin. > > Where are your plans to give back your code changes to squeak/scratch > community? No. Very egoistic, IMHO. > A fork is not to contribute back to the original project. Fork means that they are aparting themselves to reach other goals. If by luck or intentional or unintentional effort, the code can be used for the original project, that's good, but not a goal of the forkers. And then, if the fork results in a better product as compared, in practical terms, with the original project, the the people will be using the new project more than the original and new code will be written for the new project. But, that is very long in the future to know. Maybe pharo is doomed to fail, but untild then you have no right to bash the personal efforts of people and the choices they made. If you don't want to participate, fine. If you want to participate, fine. No choice is better than the other. > Where is the "soft refactoring" without destroying anything ...? At the > moment ... i see some developments with pleasure, others are catastrophic ... > > Eliot writing the 10th implementation of a squeak jitter. Fine. Every > profesional company uses LLVM. Apple e.g. > That is his problem. He has the technical ability, that I will never have, and the same applies to you. If he chose to start that effort, he must have reasoned very well, and with better arguments that you and me could give, that it worth the effort. > I wanted to know, how fast a programming language with jitter could be done. > It took me about 2 weeks ...LL(1) grammar, LLVM ... works like a charm on > Intel, ARM, PPC ... and really fast! Other platforms to be tested. Of cause, > lots of things to be done .. debugging ... profiling ... no classbrowser ... > but i can run older squeak code with morphic. 80%/20% problem ;-) Or rather > 90/10? Dunnow, i stopped the development. Was an experiment. > Good for you, but it only was for you. Eliot's effort will serve a lot more people, even as only for i386 platform at the beginning. > Will Eliots jitter run on different processor architectures? No! 386 machine > code only. So - no real portability! Who really cares that stuff then? Ever > heard of the giant chinese market? They use MIPS clone 32+64Bit processors > with Linux now. Everywhere. China can't officially use Intel, because of too > much power consumption. I've been there several times. MIPS, everywhere. In > China and Japan you find lots of people doing squeak stuff. Potential code > contributors code developers for Pharo, partners! > > Morphic code .. from SELF Programming Language development ... then ported to > squeak, then to Javascript. Fine. ETOYS on TOP. > > Where is my loved ETOYS? The only reason to use Squeak or Pharo! Education > was and is the domain of Squeak. Nothing else. > > I asked Frank Lesser for EToys / Morphic on top of his Smalltalk. Matured, > blindingly fast, Jitter written in Assembler. Now the base for DNG. Not a > great problem, he meant, he had it once ported for testing purposes. >> If i really needed a sophisticated smalltalk to start new projects ... what >> do you think, what i would take? Smalltalk for educational purposes, e.g.? I >> have free choice. But no ETOYS, anywhere. Children really love EToys. It's a >> marvelous software package for educational purposes. > That is an goal that is to be resolved by putting more software from a central repository in a clean, solid, scriptable core image. > Many companies are caught in their own jail of huge masses of GUI code. They > can't go with other smalltalks. Will they ever change to a "supported Pharo"? > I think: No. > > Morphic ... no MVC, no MVP. What has happened to Tweak code? ETOYS was ported > to that GUI. That code was quite ok. Why haven't the code autors spent that > code for Squeak/Pharo? > > So please ... don't tell me you haven't enough hands at the moment. Do the > right things, not just some few things right, beautifying GUI, implemeting > the 5th version of closures and well ... traits. > Well, some weeks ago we have the smalltalk blog guy screaming in the seaside list. At the end, no code or "hands" to solve all the thing "he" saw as imperfections in seaside. This mail appears to me that that the pharo list has now the same nemesis. > Do 'crowdsourceing', invite people to contribute, learn community organizing > first. Give them a reason to contribute. Give them a future, a business > modell to participate. > The reasons have many times been exposed. Read the squeak list. > Your egoistic path to make a commercial supported free smalltalk ... good > idea, but you are lightyears far from that. > I think that all the people here knows that pharo has a long path to walk before this happens, but a long journey begins with the first step. > Leo Penta wrote a nice book about that 'crowdsourceing' stuff, or reread > "Eric Raymond - Cathedral and the basaar" again and again and again. > *PARTICIPATION* Bring people to participate your business model. > They won't be begging for support. They have a goal, and working and steady releases of working code that give the impresion that the effort will be successful. If by looking in their results you are motivated to participate, you're welcome. If you aren't motivated, well, they will continue like every day. > LEARN from the mistakes, many, many good programmers did. See TWEAK bad fate. > Dead development process. Good sourcecode, lost in space ... like many squeak > packages. > > *Defective development process*. I posted that as issue, it was deleted by > someone not really understanding, what i meant. > > thanx for understanding. Really, I tried to understand you, but I only see complains and no code or help. Miguel Cobá > > cheers, Guido Stepken > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
