Em 27-04-2011 18:41, Jon Hancock escreveu: > Stef, > I'm with you!! Keep hacking away at Pharo and make it the cleanest, > nicest Smalltalk environment. Backwards compat talk this early in > Pharo's life is premature. Besides, one of Smalltalk's best features > is discovery and refactoring. This makes it much easier to migrate > and rewrite when things break. > > Thanks for all your work!! I'm only "playing" with pharo these days > but keep looking for U.S. clients where I can plug it in. > ~Jon +1 here.
Backwards compatibility would make sense only if there were widespread use applications. Except for seaside I cannot mention (I'm not being rude, neither willing to hurt feelings) other pharo/squeak artifact that's used in a scale enough to demand back compat. Small scale applications or stand alone solutions don't require updates/upgrades. I agree with Stef & others: the important thing at the moment is having a platform. Pharo isn't it yet. At current pace it will be soon. When it happens and people see the value to deliver mass solutions, then a requirement for back compat will appear. It's interesting but many complaints about compatibility are done regarding to packages that aren't even maintained anymore. And that happens in part because of platform deficiencies pointed by Stef. My 0,99c here... CdAB
