What if a class was deleted in Pharo? What if some methods are missing? What if it's referring to a Preference while we dumped this in favor of settings ? What if it's using some Morphic stuff that was cleaned up. Your comment assumes that everything on SqueakSource is outdated an unusable.
FYI, lots of packages there (that are 5 years old) ***do load cleanly*** in Squeak 4.3... Besides, there are LOTS of Squeak users that maintain their stuff only for Squeak without considering Pharo. Should we maintain those packages by adding some "PharoCompatibility" classes or we should start our own repository ? Finally, it's not because a package is 5 years old that it's not useful... If it's there and freely available, why would we throw all this code to the trash ? To reinvent the wheel ? I think we should seriously consider porting a lot of this stuff to our own repository before the distance between Squeak and Pharo gets too big. My 2 cents. P.S. I've read this on the #pharo-project channel on IRC : "yeah, Pharo is great but nothing on SqueakSource works with it" ----------------- Benoit St-Jean Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero. (Albert Einstein) >________________________________ > From: Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> >To: [email protected]; Benoit St-Jean <[email protected]> >Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 11:02:01 AM >Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Packages and Pharo and Portability : the 3 Ps ! > >On 29 December 2011 15:44, Benoit St-Jean <[email protected]> wrote: >> I was wondering what is planned regarding packages available on SqueakSource >> and Pharo. More and more packages can't load in Pharo and it gets more and >> more frustrating not being able to load anything without having to >> add/modify methods/classes all over the place so those packages can load >> properly in Pharo. Are we looking at a Pharo-only kind of SqueakSource in >> the future ? >> >> Besides, having to handle platform specific (i.e. Pharo vs Squeak) for every >> package is adding more complexity than what is needed. I know backward >> compatibility was thrown away from the start to avoid compromises in Pharo >> but how do we take care of the fact that as each day passes, less and less >> stuff from SqueakSource is usable in Pharo ? >> >The recipe is simple: maintenance. > >If you really care, spend time maintaining packages you using. >If nobody cares to maintain the software, it is dead. >It is only a matter of time for it to get broken. >We cannot give any guarantee that something which worked fine 10 years >ago will keep working today, >without keeping everything unchanged. > >If you have a garden and planted a rose there, do you expect that 5 >years later it will still grow there, without you taking care of it? > >-- >Best regards, >Igor Stasenko. > > >
