On Aug 29, 2011, at 10:37 PM, Lukas Renggli wrote: >>>> Is the current system simple and minimal? >>> >>> No, it is complex and it is getting bigger with every release. >> >> No, i wouldn't say so. >> >> Most fixes and improvements are still about cleaning things out and fixing >> bugs. >> But not about new features. > > Yes, you are right. In fact Pharo 1.4 is roughly 1 MB smaller than Pharo 1.3. > >> Even if you consider Zinc as a movement towards "getting bigger", >> consider an alternative: >> having library which follows standards, or keep using hacks which were >> not complete and useful only >> for most simple cases. > > Zinc is an excellent example, because it is fully backward compatible. > I don't see that with RPackage, SystemAnnouncements, Ring, Shout > (before Alan fixed it), with the proposed RB changes, ...
lukas please do not ask impossible suff. This is boring after a while. I'm not doing pharo to be compatible with broken abstractions. >> I am also against growing system unless it is necessarily. >> In 1.3. i added a new 'non-interactive' mode and non-interactive ui >> manager. And this was necessarily, because we need a way >> to deal with "hanging images" in headless mode. >> Now we can run images on jenkins, knowing that it will never enter >> 'click ok to proceed' state. > > Yes, this is cool. > >>>> Do you think the Pharo we have is good enough to have a future? >>> >>> No, there is a lot to be improved. I think the future of Pharo is what >>> can be built on top, not what can be integrated and forced upon >>> everybody. >> >> Lukas, there is nobody forcing anyone. >> How we (or anyone else) can force people to use Pharo? > > Right, but you can easily force people not to follow. I don't > understand why all the people that still use Pharo 1.0 or 1.1 don't > speak up? > >> A new and 'unproven' tools are 'forced' into images mainly to collect >> feedback. >> And i think it is good strategy, because most people *including me* >> are too busy/lazy to go & download and install new stuff and try it >> out. > > Don't we have all these automatic builds with all these tools > pre-loaded? There could be a list of links to these builds on the > website and like/+1/report buttons. That would likely yield some > discussions and give some time to investigate ...
