And for us, without Git :-).
Offray
On 06/11/16 13:27, Dimitris Chloupis wrote:
I agree Pharo works great for me with Git apart from the file tree issue.
On Sun, 6 Nov 2016 at 20:22, Offray Vladimir Luna Cárdenas
<offray.l...@mutabit.com <mailto:offray.l...@mutabit.com>> wrote:
Hi,
This thread derived on using GitHub, the transitions to it, the
mismatch
between the Smalltalk code model and the files code model. I would
like
to offer another view.
Pharo is working pretty well here. We have just finished our seventh
edition of the Data Week workshop+hackathon. This time we explored the
fossil DCVS and make some templates with mustache to
export/publish some
data visualizations. The infrastructure we have now doesn't get in our
way, installing the software with Catalog, updating with Monticello,
syncing changes while the workshop is happening, working with teapot,
tealight and the mustache binding all that went pretty smooth. The
supporting documentation for these tools was of great help.
Nicolas is making a good job in making the transition to Git/GitHub
smooth, but at the same time he is having a critical perspective
on git
and its workflow (which is not the best for every community, case or
project) and I think that's healthy, so we don't need to make Pharo
conform to git.
So I just want to add that there are other places and people
(mostly not
developers), here in Colombia, South America, that really appreciate
what the Pharo ecosystem, in its current form, is offering: its fluid,
uniform, connected, self contained, and powerful. It is a breath of
fresh air in the current overcomplicated technology. I just hope that
the migration and evolution preserve and maximize that. Keeping the
equilibrium between fast feedback, change, diversity, balkanisation,
visibility and hyper trendy is difficult, but hopefully the core
experience that Pharo is providing, will guide such equilibrium, and
continue to serve its several communities around the world.
Cheers,
Offray
On 06/11/16 07:05, stepharo wrote:
> Hi
>
> I would like that you think a bit about our community and that there
> is a value in using common tools
>
> to share and develop common libraries. Because to me it feels
like we
> are getting balkanize.
>
>
> It may look super cool and be hyper trendy to use github
(because like
> that you can say that you use latest hyper cool
>
> features), but I would like to ask especially people building
> libraries to pay attention that it is important
>
> that other people can contribute back easily and that there is
an easy
> way to load/contribute.
>
> Today I experienced Bloc
>
> - I cannot load code and I cannot contribute.
>
> - I saw mdl with a mixture between smalltalkhub and github
(sounds
> super hyper cool) and I saw paul not being able to contribute :(
>
>
> Yes you can say that monticello sucks yes it is terrible yes we all
> fell like Cobol programmers but at the end of the day.
>
> Yes the herb is always greener elsewhere. Yes yes yes. Let us take
> some facts.
>
> We managed pharo and moose with it over the last 8 years
successfully
> and Pharo and moose are not 5 packages together from
>
> what I can see. So pay attention about the decision you take.
>
> Now we will provide git support (this is 8 months that nicolas is
> exclusively working/thinking/dreaming
>
> about that) and that we are doing experiments (Guille is
managing the
> bootstrap in github).
>
> Now when everybody will have its own little project lost on
github (I
> do not count the amount of time I do not find pillar on github
because
> I forget
>
> that it is called pillar-markup), what will we do.
>
> So we need an infrastructure to handle this and christophe is
working
> on this.
>
> I think that you should consider the accidental complexity as
> something that we can minimise by using patterns and common
practices.
>
> Now you can think that I'm an idiot and that I have no vision (be my
> guest) but we should pay attention because we are a small community.
>
> Stef
>
>
>
>
>
