> Keithy, what you proposing is change the development process pattern > which people used to do for a years now, to a new, > not yet clearly evaluated paradigms. > Igor,
I don't see any change in development process at all, because there is no existing development process for writing a package that is supported in multiple forks of squeak. > I think you should be aware that forcing people to change their > development style will meet a certain oppression. From your side, as > an evangelist of a new approach, it very important to show how easy & > painless the new process is going comparing to old one. Write > tutorials , show simple 1.2.3. steps etc etc. Blaming the people that > they keep using old development techniques is not the way to go. > I am not forcing people to change their development style, the issue here has nothing to do with development style. The issue here is that I started a dialog, and I made an effort to move what was unmaintained proprietary getting-ever-more-bespoke-per-image code, into loadable packages, not tied to any one image, and into the public arena, owned by the whole community, and maintained on behalf of the whole community. This was in response to the visionary direction expressed by all parties, to work for smaller leaner and meaner kernel images. The pharo team are actively and purposefully working in the opposite direction, that's the problem. I made a lot of effort to make that dialog possible. For SUnit that dialog was initiated three years ago by making the repositories for SUnit available on squeaksource with open access, and providing a dummy SUnit that can be used to make SUnit unloadable from the main image, and by inviting participation. For Monticello it involved a lot of work merging all of the existing forks. My complaint is that the pharo guys are not participating in that dialog at all they have made no commits to that open repository. They have rudely forked a maintained code base, and they are "we have to maintain/take control" of code that is now community owned. The issue has nothing to do with the code quality or otherwise, it has nothing to do with a change in development style. The issue is one of philosophical choices being made by the leadership of the pharo team, as evidenced by daily contributions to the mailing list, which promote and demonstrate an exclusive rather than participatory attitude. Keith _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
