On Aug 29, 2011, at 10:38 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.
>
Do not compare image size!!!!!!
1.4 is smaller only(!) because we unloaded ScriptLoader13. And every MC commit
makes
the image bigger, as does every update.
> 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, ...
>
I do not want my live to be defined by being backward compatibe to what we have.
Life is short. I mean that seriously: Should it be my life's goal to make a
backward
compatible system?
I spend quite some time thinking about what to do with my future. Go to
industry,
have a real salary, and play with etoys the evening?
Stay in research and write lots of papers with lots of greek letters that
nobody reads?
Or it there a third way possible? Maybe?
But the idea of building a Smaltalk system whose only goal is to be compatbile
to Squeak-minus-eToys I never
even thought about ;-)
>>
>
> 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?
>
Are there a lot of 1.0 and 1.1 users left? They don't submit bug reports, for
sure.
Marcus
--
Marcus Denker -- http://marcusdenker.de
