On 4 November 2011 08:28, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Frank
>
> When I write we usually talk about my team or myself.

Yes, I know. I just wanted to indicate that the Pharo/Squeak split is
not as severe, for want of a better word, as might seem at first.
While Pharo and Squeak have different goals, they're not antithetical
goals.

> Now I have a question: did you sign the pharo license because else it would 
> indicate that you are not really interested in contributing
> to our vision but more taking from it. This is ok too. You can do that but 
> this is less positive energy.

Actually, I have, but I must still post it off to you. Thanks for the
reminder! (And of course the libraries I put on SqueakSource (zippers,
delimited continuations, and so on) are all MIT, and I would be most
appreciative of bug reports, critiques etc., that members of the Pharo
community might send my way.

frank

> Stef
>
>>>
>>>> Hello!
>>>>
>>>> One thing is not clear to me. How is Pharo related to standard Squeak? I 
>>>> know Pharo is a fork with its own mission, but is the development related? 
>>>> Do fixes in Pharo propagate upstream to Squeak? Is Squeak even considered 
>>>> "upstream"? Do fixes in Squeak propagate into Pharo? Automatically or 
>>>> manually? Or have they started being developed completely independently 
>>>> from some point in time?
>>>
>>> We do not really look at squeak. No time for that. Now if people having 
>>> time mentioned that we have an interesting fix then we will be inclined to 
>>> include it in pharo.
>>
>> Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by "we" - "we" as an
>> Official Pharo Official, sure, I can understand - rightly so - that
>> you're concentrating on what Pharo needs. "We" as a vocal subcommunity
>> of Pharo also work with Squeak, trying to pull the two codebases back
>> together.
>>
>> And that's a good thing, that there are both forces. Pharo the
>> Official Direction is cutting new ground in a particular direction,
>> and the Pharo+Squeak folk try to make sure that there isn't too much
>> duplication of effort. There are few enough Smalltalkers in the two
>> communities: we ought to try leverage off each other as much as we
>> can.
>>
>> frank
>>
>>> Let me restate our vision and why we decided to make Pharo.
>>> Our goal and vision behind Pharo is to twofold:
>>>        - make sure that people can make money and create their own wealth 
>>> in Smalltalk. Provide the best environment we can for that (and this is not 
>>> easy)
>>>        This is really important for us. A part of the team here is working 
>>> on setting up a company around tools build on top of Pharo.
>>>        We are really happy when we hear that people are using Pharo for 
>>> making business (net style, nextPlan, b9, pinesoft)….
>>>        This is really great.
>>>
>>>        - bring Smalltalk to the next level:
>>>                - first class variables
>>>                - small core
>>>                - may be new mop
>>>                - powerful tools and abstractions
>>>        The idea is to have a solid infrastructure to be able to invent the 
>>> next generation smalltalkish system because smalltalk lacks a lot and 
>>> innovation stopped a while ago.
>>>                (real sandboxing, real minimal kernel with pluggable ui…)
>>>
>>> It will take time but we will get there.
>>>
>>> Stef
>>>
>>
>
>
>

Reply via email to