El mié, 20-04-2011 a las 18:51 +0200, Camillo Bruni escribió:
> Objection! ;)
> 
> Using git has nothing to do with a file based system. The approach would be 
> to use git as a storage backend for monticello. Git just stores 3 types of 
> objects: commit, tree, blob. 
> There are no files involved!! So this would be perfectly compatible with and 
> image based system such as smalltalk.
> 
> see: http://book.git-scm.com/1_the_git_object_model.html
> 
> 
> personal rant from here on >>>
> 
> However I see that smalltalkers tend to ignore the fact that there are other 
> tools not written in smalltalk which are widely used and they actually work! 
> For instance monticello. Although the model works perfectly fine, the UI is 
> just plain crap, it does not provide a nice workflow nor is it readable... 
> Git on the other hand might be too complex, but it lets do more stuff on the 
> command line, in an easier fashion than the mc tool.
> 
> Smalltalkers tend to reinvent the wheel, which is sometimes nice, if its well 
> designed and actually works, but many times its rather a waste of time, than 
> just relying on existing working infrastructure that people outside smalltalk 
> build.
> 
> What I see in Pharo is a good move towards making these tools work again, 
> most of them are just old and ignore common UI principles.
> 
> 
> And Smalltalk is not the holy grail, its just yet another programming 
> language, which has nice syntax ;).

+10

> 
> 
> On 2011-04-20, at 18:10, Serge Stinckwich wrote:
> > Even if SmalltalkHub looks like GitHub, its still based on Monticello.
> > Another aspect also important in github and similar tools is social coding.
> > This is very easy to follow your favorite developpers and to
> > participate by cloning his/her repository.
> > 
> > Regards
> > 
> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 11:01 PM, Dale Henrichs <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Smalltalk is not file-based. For better or for worse.
> >> 
> >> The fundamental problem with Smalltalk is that it is image-based.
> >> 
> >> Removing a method from a file is not sufficient to remove the method from 
> >> the image.
> >> 
> >> Change sets were invented to provide a file-based solution to the "how do 
> >> I remove a method from the image" problem.
> >> 
> >> A filein (the one used to initialize your image) plus a series of change 
> >> sets applied in the right order is the file-based methodology for managing 
> >> an image.
> >> 
> >> Change sets are integral to Smalltalk.
> >> 
> >> Name another language that uses change sets ...
> >> 
> >> I cannot distribute a fresh set of source files to _upgrade_ an already 
> >> installed application. I have to supply change sets and those change sets 
> >> have to specific to the version that is installed in the image ...
> >> 
> >> Remember the problem is "how do I remove a method from the image".
> >> 
> >> The image is a data base, not an executable program, when you load code 
> >> you also migrate/modify the objects in your "data base".
> >> 
> >> Name another language that does this....
> >> 
> >> Monticello was invented along the way ... I cannot speak to the original 
> >> motivation, but I can say that with Monticello I _can_ distribute a fresh 
> >> set of source files to _upgrade_ an already installed application.
> >> 
> >> Monticello does this by having a meta model that describes the complete 
> >> application. The meta model is not a "source file" it is a serialized 
> >> object graph.
> >> 
> >> Monticello dynamically creates a change set by comparing the meta model of 
> >> the loaded application with the meta model of the incoming "source code".
> >> 
> >> Name another language that does this....
> >> 
> >> So the meat and potatoes of a Monticello mcz file is a binary chunk of 
> >> data....
> >> 
> >> What does git do with binary data? What do humans do with binary data?
> >> 
> >> You need a tool that takes the binary data and makes it readable for the 
> >> poor developers who cannot unzip and deserialize a binary stream of bits 
> >> on sight.
> >> 
> >> Enter SqueakSource and SmalltalkHub....
> >> 
> >> This is where we are today.
> >> 
> >> Can Smalltalk development be based on files....certainly everyone was 
> >> doing file-based development in 1985, but the Smalltalk environments of 
> >> the day migrated away from files ...
> >> 
> >> In 1985 I was writing tools to store files and change sets in RCS ... the 
> >> original ChangeSorter was based on my work back then...
> >> 
> >> In 1993 I was working on tools that stored Smalltalk source meta data 
> >> using PKZIP ...
> >> 
> >> ENVY stores source meta data into a custom data base....
> >> 
> >> Store stores source meta data in an RDB...
> >> 
> >> In 2011 I am working on tools that store Smalltalk source meta data using 
> >> zip ...
> >> 
> >> Smalltalk is image-base and the "standard" development tools just don't 
> >> fit ... for better or for worse ...
> >> 
> >> Sooooo, we can complain that we are not using git, but there are very good 
> >> reasons for not using git ... today.
> >> 
> >> Just because 20 years of evolution has moved Smalltalk away from using 
> >> files in the traditional manner, doesn't mean that it won't evolve back to 
> >> using files, but until the evolution happens, we need tools like 
> >> SqueakSource3 and SmalltalkHub to support the _current_ model.
> >> 
> >> Dale
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Miguel Cobá
http://twitter.com/MiguelCobaMtz
http://miguel.leugim.com.mx




Reply via email to