thanks for the update. Stef
On May 24, 2010, at 2:42 AM, Julian Fitzell wrote: > The fact that MC2 is still a moving target. Or at least it would be if it was > moving. :) More to the point, the early releases had some problems that > prompted further redesign and I'd recommend against creating large amounts of > date in those versions that will need to be brought forward. In other words, > I don't think it's ready for prime time in its current state. > > Julian > > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 1:34 PM, Geert Claes <[email protected]> wrote: > > What would be the biggest challenges moving to MC2 and a MC2 Repository like > SourceTalk? > > > Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > > Hi Geert. I agree it would awesome to have Monticello 2 and SourcTalk for > > Pharo 1.2. I have not idea the status. I tested once (you can see > > squeakdbx there) but I have a lot of problems. And the project seems > > "dead". I mean, I don't think someone is working on it. That said, it > > would be great someone to work on it and maybe start to using it by Pharo > > 1.2 > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/Metacello-and-SourceTalk-tp2219294p2219517.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > 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
