In the pharo board we have discussed several times the LTS thingy. As others said, problem with this is it costs time, and time is money (that we do not have for the moment).
It is certainly something in our horizon, but for now is just not possible. I don’t know which kind of applications are in play here, but I find hard to believe the effort of migrating from Pharo 6 to Pharo 7 (to put an example) is so big since I migrated all my projects in no-time. Of course migrating from Pharo 2 to Pharo 7 will take more effort than just catch up the last version. But to improve migration recently we introduce auto rewrite tools. This works fine up to a point. Stability in other terms… what does it means? Stability in the API? Stability in the execution? While the 2nd is a must, the 1st is complicated because you have to have a compromise with the need of evolution. Nevertheless, I would say that the core of Pharo is very stable and what is not so much is the tooling. This is because we are still looking for the right tooling (and because needs change, 10 years ago IoT was not a thing nor we should be prepared to it, and now is “the new kid in the block” and we need to answer to it. Lot of other things accumulate what this days is called “technical debt” and we need to answer to that. That breaks “stability”, but breaks it in a positive way. So… I have my doubts about what stability means. If it means no change. It is a no go (but users can always stick with older versions, is not that we are hiding them). If it means eternal backward compatibility. It is too expensive (and also an eventual stagnation) So we choose to be “stable in our goals” : to provide each version an improved version of Pharo that users can enjoy (that the origin of this thread that has been suddenly highjacked for just one of the topics), while trying to be as effortless as possible to catch up (but of course, “as effortless as possible” does not means zero effort). Esteban > On 12 Apr 2019, at 03:06, john pfersich <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1 on the long term support idea. Changing an application every year to > support a new version of Pharo is a nonstarter for most of my clients. > > /*—————————————————-*/ > Sent from my iPhone > https://boincstats.com/signature/-1/user/51616339056/sig.png > See https://objectnets.net and https://objectnets.org > >> On Apr 11, 2019, at 06:33, "[email protected]" >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> +1 on the long term support and stability topic. >
