Sven, > On Mar 5, 2016, at 1:05 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote: > > >> On 05 Mar 2016, at 19:57, Ben Coman <b...@openinworld.com> wrote: >> >> On Sun, Mar 6, 2016 at 2:10 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote: >>> >>>> On 05 Mar 2016, at 18:22, Eliot Miranda <eliot.mira...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Stef, >>>> >>>>> On Mar 5, 2016, at 12:10 AM, stepharo <steph...@free.fr> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> You probably leave in a protected environment but I do not live in the >>>>> same. >>>>> Did you check numPy recently or R? momemtum? >>>>> Do you think that people do not know how to count? >>>>> In 1980 my students were not even born, so how can it be better than >>>>> python, java, c#, lua, ... >>>>> >>>>> Do you think that it makes me happy to see my old friends leaving our >>>>> language and do node.js. >>>>> Seriously. >>>>> Why do you blame me? Frankly tell to leave Pharo and I will leave. I can >>>>> tell you. >>>>> I think that I need a break in my life in this moment so it would be a >>>>> good opportunity. >>>>> Because if each time I do something to improve the wealth and visibility >>>>> of our system >>>>> I get such kind of feedback then may be this is the time to do something. >>>>> Afterall I may be wrong. >>>>> Seriously if you think that I'm not doing a good job and you want to stay >>>>> with old friends >>>>> just let me know. but if I stay then do not tell me that I'm an asshole >>>>> that does not want to >>>>> promote smalltalk. >>>> >>>> I do not blame you. I am offended by Pharo disavowing the Smalltalk name. >>>> I am offended when people state Pharo is not Smalltalk. I want to refute >>>> false assumptions about the name Smalltalk, such as the equating it with >>>> cobol. Instead of taking it personally why don't you address my points >>>> about older programming languages whose names (AFAICT) are not perceived >>>> negatively? >>>> >>>> >>>> I support this community and am excited to participate in it. I admire >>>> and respect your efforts, Stéphane, in developing, organizing and >>>> supporting this community. But that does not mean I will keep quiet about >>>> something I profoundly disagree with and think is wrong. And that thing >>>> is to deny Pharo is Smalltalk. >>>> >>>> And I do this not because I am a zealot, but because words meaning are >>>> important, because to understand each other we should call a spade a >>>> spade, and because I am grateful for and delighted by this thing called >>>> Smalltalk, and I will not support taking credit away from it. Ruby is >>>> inspired by Smalltalk. Pharo is the real thing. >>> >>> Pharo was started because a certain situation existed in the Squeak >>> community that blocked progress for a group of people that had another >>> vision. Pharo was started and exists to fulfil that grand vision, a vision >>> that is clearly rooted in Smalltalk history, but goes beyond that. >>> >>> If you want to focus on words, your sentence 'Pharo is Smalltalk' is not so >>> innocent or politically free, as you know very well, even if it looks like >>> factually correct (it is BTW). >>> >>> We say it differently because of what I just wrote, because we want to be >>> free of backwards compatibility (if necessary), because we want to have a >>> larger future than maintaining something old (even though we absolutely >>> respect and acknowledge it). Yes, it is a bit of a play of words, but not >>> without reason. >>> >>> Here is one writeup that tries to describe the same idea: >>> >>> http://www.tudorgirba.com/blog/pharo-is-pharo >>> >>> But the best documents are the Pharo vision documents. >> >> >> The counter argument is that there was Smalltalk-71, -72, -76, -78, >> -80. Some of these were distinctly different from the last. So >> Smalltalk was an *evolving* system. Why can't it be so again!? and >> be Smalltalk-Renew, Smalltalk-Next, Smalltalk-Evolved, Smalltalk-16, >> Smalltalk-P16 or Smalltalk-P5 "Pharo 5". >> >> As long as the emphasis is on Pharo being an *evolution* of Smalltalk >> (which is not in doubt), I think we cover all bases - stimulating the >> interest of newcomers and/or detractors of old, as well as Smalltalk >> stalwarts without being constrained by the past. As much as we might >> want to promote Pharo being separate from Smalltalk (which I believe >> was a reasonable strategy to establish identity at the time of the >> fork from Squeak), Smalltalk is always going to be there for anyone >> who scratches beneath the surface and they end up thinking "Oh its >> *just* Smalltalk" anyway. So this remains the "elephant in the room", >> *subtly* undermining of our marketing. Its the sort of weakness that >> can be better to hit head on as "Smalltalk-Evolved" (since "Evolved" >> is a term with positive connotations in the gaming / sci-fi >> communities.) >> >> cheers -ben > > Really, Ben, are you suggesting we stop calling it Pharo ?
That's not at all what I read Ben as suggesting. See below... > > Come on, let's be serious. > > (BTW, this thread started with a discussion about the naming of an external > library, which is entirely up to the main developers driving that library, > not us). > > What makes Pharo different is this: you (and so many others) came to this > community as a stranger (for us), started contributing in various ways, we > saw that you were serious/good and we accepted your work, letting you work on > very fundamental code that had the potential to break everything. There is > simply no way that you could have done or be allowed to do that in any other > Smalltalk, let alone the place where we forked from. It is as simple as that. > That is why it is called Pharo, why we say Pharo is yours. Look at your language (with which I am happy). "There is simply no way that you could have done or be allowed to do that in any other Smalltalk...". That implies Pharo is a Smalltalk but it is its own version. That's /not/ what "Smalltalk-inspired" means at all. When one tries to say Pharo is not a Smalltalk, then I have an issue. No one is saying that Pharo is not unique or saying anything pejorative. All we're saying is that Pharo is a Smalltalk. > >>>>> Stef >>>>> >>>>> Le 5/3/16 02:18, Eliot Miranda a écrit : >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 12:08 PM, stepharo <steph...@free.fr> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> SciPharo? Not so great news from my POV. >>>>>>> What is so much pharo specific in this library? >>>>>>> Is Smalltalk scientific community large enough for yet another split? >>>>>> Split of what? Let us be tagged with a name of 1980 and die in peace. >>>>>> Yes this looks like a >>>>>> smart move. >>>>>> There are just Python and R and Javascript around (not talking about >>>>>> ruby and swift) >>>>>> so this is a great move. We are not the cobol of object-oriented >>>>>> programming!! >>>>>> >>>>>> When I read sentiments like this it makes me want to leave the >>>>>> community. I find it so offensive that the Pharo community uses >>>>>> Smalltalk but wants to distance itself. It feels like theft or massive >>>>>> disrespect for the inventors of the language, or a complete lack of >>>>>> gratitude. >>>>>> >>>>>> C is older than Smalltalk and no one says "C is the cobol of low-level >>>>>> imperative languages". List is much older than C but no one wants to >>>>>> rename Lisp because it is perceived as old. >>>>>> >>>>>> Smalltalk is a beautiful name, carefully chosen to differentiate and >>>>>> identify the system as different, not arrogant, not hieroglyphic. >>>>>> Further, Smalltalkl /is/ different and distinctive materially. Why >>>>>> anyone would be ashamed of that incredible heritage and pervasive >>>>>> influence is beyond me. >>>>>> >>>>>> Offended, >>>>>> Eliot > >
