Stef, I like how you're thinking, but your list raises one question in
my mind: how do you propose to load anything into "Mini" without a
Compiler? Sorry if that's a stupid question, but I need to know :-p
--
Cheers,
Peter.
On 20 apr 2010, at 08.59, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.duca...@inria.fr>
wrote:
The question is what we call core.
I think that core should contain less and less but pharo should
contain infrastructure and FFI or Alien
are infrastructure.
If you look at my answer to German on "Re: [Pharo-project] Really
Important message (tm)"
April 16
You can see that with a fast loading package mechanism then we could
really introduce in "Pharo-Core" (= what we have now)
infrastructure package to produce Pharo and works on making a real
core. FFI does not belong to this core=mini but
to Pharo from my point of view
Mini
Mini + FFI + Tools + IDE + Compiler ....= PharoCore
Pharo + Sounds + Morphic examples + archiview.... = Pharo
Note that the belonging of one package to group is not automatically
clear.
This is why metacello is key and a metacelloRepository.
Steg
I wouldn't include neither FFI or Alien FFI in neither PharoCore
or PharoDev
image.
+1
That's only my opinion.
Maybe Stef should tell us more about why he thinks it should be
included.
Bye
T.
--
GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT!
Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
