On Aug 8, 2011, at 11:27 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >> >> >> OK, some clean up was required, but you see, you can make things worse >> when cleaning... > > Yes but in average this is really not the case. > >> It's like Pharo cleaning removed the antidote, but forgot to remove >> the poison... > > Ok that kinds of things happens in ugly, undocumented, obsolete systems. > >> Now, of course, instead of a local polishing, it would be possible to >> rewrite all. > > I'm starting to write tests for the events. Now since you are at it, I guess > that you read this wonderful code > full of hypothesis and other subtle strange behavior. So I'm quite sure that > they will be problems. > But we will fix them. Else we should stop now and do Javascript because at > least we will look cool. > >> But please, don't do it blindly and loose 2 third of features like the >> new implementors window :( > > We are not doing things blindly: > > First it costs us money, time and we should all the lucky that Ben was > really good and enjoy rewriting us boring UI > without a decent widgets set (because he fixed them also the > multiselection and others). > Benjamin I publicly thank you for all the good stuff you did!!!!
Thanks you very much ;) > > > Second, what are these 2 thirds that we lost? Because two third is a > lot. I'm dreaming to throw away two third of the stringHolder hierarCrap > Please hightlight me. > > Sorry but I do not like this kind of statements because there are false and > because we work hard to bring to life > a system full of shit. Shit that was accumulated and of course stable because > it did not move since years. > In addition if everytime a guy spend 4 months to build a new tools we all > complain (without constructive points to help him fixing that) > better say to students that they are idiots and that we do not need their > help. But in that case be ready to be with the same ugly system > in the future. And we do not accept that. So there will be some glitches but > we are stronger than them and we will fix them. > > Nicolas I'm quite sure that you would not say that around a beer to benjamin > because I know you so pay attention because > Ben is also one of the coolest students we got recently and we really liked > his spirit and atttitude. Jumping in StringHolder and broken/duplicated > widgets > is not easy, nor it is to work on bootstrapping Pharo. > > Stef About implementors we have decided, Stef and I, that at some points, things have to move to be better. I know and I assume not to be a perfect coder nor a Smalltalk expert, but at least, I think that when I am directed in the good direction I can do some good stuffs. Moreover we are fully aware that we are providing tools for a large community which do not want to be disturbed in its work, but we strongly believe in our community, and I think (and I guess Stef too) that we are all smart enough to understand that we will go further all together. To come back to Implementors, I could complain and say that the code was a mess, with no tests to cover expected behaviors, but the point is that I really want to move on. So I have done my best, I am proud it was integrated, and at the same time, I am a bit sad that some users are not fully convinced by this new version (and I know how boring it could be to loose a useful behavior). I have experimented this version for weeks before it was integrating but as every one knows, I am still a newby here, and probably I do not used to use all the behaviors of the old Implementors. The problem is that we can't ask each Pharoer if the new version is good enough to be integrated. At some point, we have to integrate stuff, get a lot of feedbacks, fix the tools, and improve the system. It's not a perfect system, there is a chaotic state, but we are a community. It's the best way we have found to get people involved, but it's clearly not perfect. And here, it seems that we have missed a step. Where is your feedback ? Ok it's the first step to say that some crucial things are missing (and I apologize for that) but if we want things to be better, I please you to open clear and detailed bugs entries, like that I could (or someone else) fix this tool. As far as I know, when I see a bug entry about one of my tools, I try to fix it asap :) So my answer is a bit long, but I hope it will be clear :) Ben > > >> >> Nicolas >> >>> -- >>> Best regards, >>> Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >>> >>> >> > >
