I think that the concept of a LTS will become useful at one point. Like, every 3 versions or so.
On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Dale Henrichs < dale.henri...@gemtalksystems.com> wrote: > Norbert, > > I didn't realize that you were claiming that the new text model for Sparta > was (potentially) inferior. > > The other day you were expressing sadness about having to use the newer > version of Metacello (which is *only* 3 years old), so I assumed that you > were just being generally cranky about change:). > > Dale > > On 10/21/16 6:50 AM, Norbert Hartl wrote: > > Dale, > > I was not arguing against evolution. I was refering to the fact that work > of others is mostly ignored just to come up with a potential weaker > solution. > > Norbert > > Am 21.10.2016 um 15:34 schrieb Dale Henrichs < > dale.henri...@gemtalksystems.com>: > > Norbert, > > It is also called evolution ... with each step forward new possibilities > are revealed and often the old (current) way of doing things needs to > change to better leverage these new possibilities ... and evolution is > required[4]. > > Change is also painful and keeping up with an ever-changing system takes a > lot of individual effort. > > If you don't want to deal with change, then pick a Pharo version and stick > with it ... Pharo3.0 is still functional and I for one make sure that all > new versions of Metacello work on older versions of Squeak, Pharo and > GemStone[1] --- but you don't have to use the newer version of Metacello if > you don't want to:). > > I use Pharo3.0 on a daily basis for tODE -- I decided that I wanted to > spend my time evolving and changing tODE itself rather than spend a portion > of every year porting to a newer version of Pharo. Fortunately I don't NEED > the fancy new widgets in Pharo3.0 to make progress with tODE. > > Metacello is not the only project to ensure that it continues to function > on older versions of Pharo. Seaside[2], Voyage[3] and I'm sure others make > an effort to continue to function on older versions of Pharo --- the > technology exists for maintaining compatibility with older versions of > Pharo for those projects that aren't making the effort now. > If you choose to leverage the benefits of the newer versions of Pharo, > then you must accept the cost, but you can pace yourself if the rate of > change becomes too much. > > Dale > > [1] https://travis-ci.org/dalehenrich/metacello-work/builds/168940183 > > [2] https://travis-ci.org/SeasideSt/Seaside/builds/160382244 > > [3] https://travis-ci.org/pharo-nosql/voyage/builds/167012791 > > [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_evolution > > On 10/21/16 12:10 AM, Norbert Hartl wrote: > > > > Am 21.10.2016 um 04:00 schrieb Sean P. DeNigris <s...@clipperadams.com>: > > Denis Kudriashov wrote > > I look at code and it seems you implemented another one new text model? > > Why > > you not use TxText? > > > Argh. I know it's bad form to complain about gifts, but at the rate we > reinvent the wheel, I often fear that I will be retired from programming > before we have a sane text model :/ > > It has a name and we should fight it: > > https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_invented_here > > Norbert > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/ANN- > Sparta-v1-1-tp4919394p4919570.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at > Nabble.com <http://nabble.com/>. > > > > >
