So you even got a solution :) Excellent! But this is also a good point because it means that for the future we will have again this kind of discussion.....exciting.
Stef On Feb 27, 2009, at 6:06 PM, Michael Rueger wrote: > Philippe Marschall wrote: >> Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >>> I have problems to understand why this would be not reasonable that >>> people load a give kom version for seaside on squeak >>> and one for seaside on pharo. >> >> Loading is one thing. What bothers we more is the maintenance >> situation. >> Let's face it, there are far too resources behind something as >> important >> as Kom. Making a fork of it cuts these resources in half. > > Hmm, I think most of the discussion is simply a misunderstanding, I'm > not forking anything. > > With my changes to Pharo (which of course first need to be > integrated), > the changed (not forked!) version of Kom and the few changes for > Seaside > (which need to be integrated) there is no need for a fork!!! > > Those versions should work on both Squeak and Pharo. > > It's not monkey patching, none of the packages touch other stuff any > more than they did before. I just changed Kom so its monkey patching > now > works on both Seaside and Pharo. > > And that's where I need you help testing. > > Michael > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
