Hi, I think I might have misunderstood your mail :).
Tthe intention behind Brick is not to be a separate framework but an internal tool for GT. At least not now, and at least not before we investigate how we get to the end goal of having a vectorial canvas (hence Bloc). Is this satisfying? Cheers, Doru On Tue, Mar 24, 2015 at 1:44 PM, Nicolai Hess <nicolaih...@web.de> wrote: > > > 2015-03-24 12:37 GMT+01:00 Tudor Girba <tu...@tudorgirba.com>: > >> Hi Nicolai, >> >> I am surprised by your conclusion that the current Brick implementation >> disqualifies it from being part of the Core :) >> > > not the implementation, the uncertainty of its purpose - a GT private > implementation / a public framework. > > >> >> >> All in all, you should see Brick as a pragmatic intermediary step towards >> removing Morph. I agree that it can be better (what cannot be), but I >> disagree we should discard GT because of it. >> > > I did not say "discard GT" . Brick is in the image, but I don't want to > have it in the > core image *as another UI-library* next to what we already have - without > cleaning that up. > > You know the questions on the mailing list about what framework to use for > creating an application:pure Morphic/Polymorph/Spec/Glamour, > and yes I am sure people will come and ask "hey how can I create such cool > looking application like spotter". > It is already difficult for new people to step in, and get an idea how to > work in pharo, or find information about the different frameworks. > > Nicolai > > > > >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "Every thing has its own flow" >> > > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
