> Then i would ask the O2 developers, why is the fork needed? Just curious, > because if 02 copies a lot from OB, to add more functionality why that extra > features cant be part of OB?
I don't know, but I guess one of the reasons is that there is not a single test case for any of the new functionality. In comparison the OB code-base is extremely well tested, it has a very high code-coverage and even the morphic GUI code has tests. Another problem is that the O2 code does not use the meta-model everywhere, some parts are just hardcoded. Also its code is not properly packaged, so the very generic framework to build browsers suddenly includes behavior that just make sense for some specific Smalltalk code browsers. Furthermore OB is designed to be platform independent (like Seaside). The same code is for example used in GemStone and Squeak. O2 is full of platform dependent code. It's a pity because OB could be really much more powerful. Lukas -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
