On Sat, Jan 8, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.duca...@inria.fr>wrote:
> > On Jan 7, 2011, at 5:10 PM, Miguel Cobá wrote: > > > I concur with Mariano and wonder why Stéphane wants a smaller dev image? > > Because we have to fix bug of packages that we do not know, control, want > to fix... > Because been agile to load and having a good infrastructure for validating > packages is way more > important than preloading XML. If we spend our time on the infrastructure > (metacello publication, > configuration certification, hudson reporting) then the complete ecosystem > will get better > and you should be able to automate several builds and pharo-dev whatever. > I'm concerned that our resources are limited and they are a lot of ugly > ugly things in the system > Now not everybody should work on them but then the insfrastructure is more > important. > I agree that we should care about what packages are included in Pharo. But actually for newbies it's still complicated to discover and learn how to load a ConfigurationOfXXX. So one goal of Pharo 1.3 should be to have a GUI to load additional tools / libs / frameworks in one click (I've seen there's one included, that's a good step forward, but some work is needed). For Pharo 1.2 I'd rather leave XML in because today I expect that every programming environment used in enterprise supports XML out of the box. It would also like a PharoBloat image built by Hudson with all ConfigurationOfXXX which are supposed to work on all operating systems. Laurent. > > > > > Right now there are two images, the core and the dev. As the core is > > promoted for deploying, the size of the dev isn't an issue. At least in > > terms of deploying. > > > > Now the dev image is currently targeted to new users, so I think that it > > should have everything that is know to work in Pharo loaded, so that > > the users doesn't have to cope with the installation issue of new > > packages. > > This also means that tutorials and documentation can be straightforward. > > Just showing what they want to teach, and not explaining what to do to > > install some random package. So this will help document and promote > > Pharo. > > > > Now maybe the name dev is misleading. It says development although the > > image is for everyone that is not deploying some application. On the > > other side, there isn't officially a dev image, only PharoCore and > > Pharo. So maybe we need to create a official PharoDev image targeted to > > the developers but this is also very subjective as what packages made a > > development environment, it is upon the developer. So maybe this make no > > sense at all. > > > > So the options are: > > > > 1. Refer to Pharo dev as Pharo, the official name and officially make it > > targeted to new users and so include everything under the sun (like the > > fun images of Edgar, that can show off the capabilities of Pharo) > > 2. Create a PharoDev, with a list of common dev packages, also > > officially supported > > > > TL;DR; Pharo is for new users and should include everything preloaded. > > PharoCore is for deploying and the developer install just what he wants. > > Maybe a PharoDev is needed targeted directly to developers. > > > > Cheers > > -- > > Miguel Cobá > > http://twitter.com/MiguelCobaMtz > > http://miguel.leugim.com.mx > > > > > > > > > > >
