On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 6:14 AM Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
>
> This is all true, BUT ...
>
> Very few people attempt to do fundamental
> changes/cleanups/subsystem-replacements in the core image.
This all true, BUT ... :-)
> This takes a lot of work, is never easy and almost always has
This is all true, BUT ...
Very few people attempt to do fundamental
changes/cleanups/subsystem-replacements in the core image. This takes a lot of
work, is never easy and almost always has issues.
Resources are limited as well, in theory things can be done better, in practice
in the real
To me it certainly looks like a to get things in
by all means. Have to admit I had this kind of "panic mode" myself several
times in the past too ;)
Stef writes he now does not have the time nor energy - which I guess (including
his reactions) is a tribute to his workload.
But then it would
--- Begin Message ---
Stéphane,
You could have said the exact same thing in nicer words, calmly WITHOUT
SHOUTING and taking it personal.
If people criticize stuff/work/code, it's because 1) they care about
Pharo 2) they use Pharo. The day no one will complain on the list will
mean Pharo's
Why is there no deprecation for classes?
The class definition can belong to a deprecated package.
For more advanced feature, the deprected globals could belong to another
dictionary, a bit like Undeclared...
Le mer. 27 nov. 2019 à 21:31, ducasse a écrit :
> Cyril
>
> there is no deprecation for
Cyril
there is no deprecation for classes: yes I would have to subclass each class
and provide old classes.
Sorry but *I*** repackaged, cleaned the tests, cleaned the baseline,
made sure that the baseline is working …. of
- GTRecorder (not used in Pharo since 3 YEARS).
> On 27 Nov 2019, at 14:05, Cyril Ferlicot wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 6:29 PM ducasse wrote:
>>
>> Cyril
>>
>> We are crawling with too many things.
>> Pharo should start to lose fat FOR REAL.
>> I really hope that we will get rid of lot of old code in the future.
>> If Enlumineur
On Wed, Nov 27, 2019 at 2:17 PM Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote:
>
>
>
> Yes, this could have been handled much better, I guess (I don't know the
> details).
>
> But for day to day work, you have to use Pharo 7, which should be 100%
> stable, while Pharo 8 is a moving target, an alpha version that
> On 27 Nov 2019, at 14:05, Cyril Ferlicot wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 6:29 PM ducasse wrote:
>>
>> Cyril
>>
>> We are crawling with too many things.
>> Pharo should start to lose fat FOR REAL.
>> I really hope that we will get rid of lot of old code in the future.
>> If Enlumineur
On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 6:29 PM ducasse wrote:
>
> Cyril
>
> We are crawling with too many things.
> Pharo should start to lose fat FOR REAL.
> I really hope that we will get rid of lot of old code in the future.
> If Enlumineur does not work when we integrate it - I just issue a PR
> then you
2019 um 18:29 Uhr
> Von: "ducasse"
> An: "Pharo Development List"
> Betreff: Re: [Pharo-dev] BlueInk removal
>
> Cyril
>
> We are crawling with too many things.
> Pharo should start to lose fat FOR REAL.
> I really hope that we will get rid of lot of old code
> On 26 Nov 2019, at 14:16, Cyril Ferlicot wrote:
>
> On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 2:07 PM ducasse wrote:
>>
>> Cyril can you wait until this evening?
>> We should remove old things and having the two side by side is a lot more
>> painful
>> to work.
>> We are still in Pharo 80 alpha.
>>
>>
On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 2:07 PM ducasse wrote:
>
> Cyril can you wait until this evening?
> We should remove old things and having the two side by side is a lot more
> painful
> to work.
> We are still in Pharo 80 alpha.
>
> Stef
>
Can't we deprecate it? It's 1200 LoC, if it's deprecated
Cyril can you wait until this evening?
We should remove old things and having the two side by side is a lot more
painful
to work.
We are still in Pharo 80 alpha.
Stef
> On 26 Nov 2019, at 11:55, Cyril Ferlicot wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Can we revert the removal of blueink the time the new
Hi,
Can we revert the removal of blueink the time the new formatter is in
the image please? (And maybe deprecate it instead of removing it).
I ask this because:
- If we work with Pharo 8 we need to format the code by hand because
the format option is currently messing the code
- The current
15 matches
Mail list logo
