On 2 January 2012 18:44, Lukas Renggli <[email protected]> wrote: >> is not that *it can't* is that, as a development platform, Pharo needs to >> provide kernel+tools, not just kernel. >> Anyway, I was not arguing against having a small kernel, I was arguing >> against pharo "just doing" the kernel. >> Linux itself can't be distributed just as a kernel, it is distributed with a >> full set of different tools: GNU/Linux, Ubuntu Linux, etc. (btw... this is >> one of the arguments Stallman allways says about Linux: it was possible >> because there was already a lot of tools) And, in that case, just as Linux, >> we can't just do the kernel, we need to provide development tools... >> otherwise, people wont use it. I myself wont use it for my commercial >> applications if I do not have something like OmniBrowser to develop. > > I totally agree, the Pharo Kernel alone is not very useful for an > end-user. However, with the emerging Pharo architecture you can hardly > build a different distribution. > > To use the Linux analogy: You are trying to convince GNU/Linux to > rebuild their system on top of a full-fledged Ubuntu distribution. > >> What I'm NOT saying: Kernel and Tools should be coupled. (If ppl whant >> kernel+other things, they are welcome to have it... I myself will want it) > > This coupling is exactly what is happening. How do you propose to > build your kernel+other distribution?
What coupling you are talking about? Can you give an example? Instead we striving to decouple components of the system and improve infrastructure. If you speaking about announcements, so here the vision: - there are tons of different event driving mechanisms in image and we want to leave only one, replacing all of them with announcements. Will this couple tools to announcements? Of course. Will this add unnecessary coupling between layers? No. Because announcements is inherently serving for decoupling event source(s) from event consumers. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
