On Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 01:50:06PM +0200, Marcus Denker wrote: > > On Apr 15, 2012, at 1:44 PM, Edgar J. De Cleene wrote: > > > > And wish made experiments if this Foo.fuel could be loaded into different > > fork as Squeak, Cuis having Fuel into. > > I would not waste time with that... we will improve Pharo constantly, and it > will > be very hard (if not impossible) to keep some kind of compatibility layer on > a binary > code level between Pharo, Squeak and Cuis. > > And what do you get out of it? Wouldn't it be better to use the time to > improve one system > and make sure that system has a future?
Fuel seems to be well written and organized. Even though I have only used Fuel a little (for remote task execution with OSProcess), I was able to easily understand the code when I loaded it in Squeak. There is no reason that a well-written package cannot be maintained for several flavors of the image. That is a sign of competent developers doing good work :) Dave
