Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

feel free to do pull request :) On Sat, Jul 8, 2017 at 9:33 AM, Clément Bera wrote: > The incremental GC is already mentioned in "Better support for large heaps > (GC tuning API, incremental GC)". Now we have a second paragraph about the > incremental GC, that's redundant

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

On 06-07-17 23:56, Eliot Miranda wrote: But what I was getting at in my comment was that, while 64-bit server applications are indeed very important, I have not been contacted by anyone yet complaining about scaling problems with the 64-bit system. It has been too early to get scaling

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

> On 8 Jul 2017, at 09:33, Clément Bera wrote: > > The incremental GC is already mentioned in "Better support for large heaps > (GC tuning API, incremental GC)". Now we have a second paragraph about the > incremental GC, that's redundant and the form of the paragraph

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

So should/could we take the roadmap and put two main headings: Consortium Community And under those, headings we put the things you have suggested and try to order them a bit? It might be nice at PharoDays next year to be able to point to that list and show show what the consortium made

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

The incremental GC is already mentioned in "Better support for large heaps (GC tuning API, incremental GC)". Now we have a second paragraph about the incremental GC, that's redundant and the form of the paragraph is not consistent with the rest of the roadmap where each feature has 1 or 2 lines of

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

> Actually that's a good point - should the roadmap encompass what the > community can offer too (i hadn't appreciated the distinction )? Yes it does. Esteban (and christophe 60% paid by rmod) and guille (60% but also writing papers) cannot do all that alone? > We collectively pay for some

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

Actually that's a good point - should the roadmap encompass what the community can offer too (i hadn't appreciated the distinction )? We collectively pay for some things to be achieved, but also we expect that we can contribute some of the lower hanging fruit. Of course some things are at the

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 11:27 PM, Tim Mackinnon wrote: > I didn’t mean to touch a nerve - and this was why I wrote “minor” points - > but you did ask for feedback… you did not :) Just that if we just count on fully book engineers working on super important features we will not

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

On Friday 07 July 2017 03:26 AM, Eliot Miranda wrote: Let's say that currently the mark-compact collector collects at about 1Gb per second (that's about what I'm seeing on my MacMini for a 600Mb heap, collected and compacted in about 530ms on a 2.3GHz Core i7, = 1.1Gb/s). For the moment let's

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

> On 6 Jul 2017, at 23:56, Eliot Miranda wrote: > > Hi Sven, > > On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: > > > On 6 Jul 2017, at 18:41, Eliot Miranda wrote: > > > > Hi Stef, > > > >> On Jul 6, 2017, at

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

Hi Sven, On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: > > > On 6 Jul 2017, at 18:41, Eliot Miranda wrote: > > > > Hi Stef, > > > >> On Jul 6, 2017, at 1:55 AM, Stephane Ducasse > wrote: > >> > >> We would like to

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

Hi Stef, On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Stephane Ducasse wrote: > I updated the roadmap. > > Btw eliot I think that you should sync with clement and esteban. > trust me, we do. > I'm not the guy taking decision here. We should agree on the key > elements of the

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 12:44 PM, Denis Kudriashov wrote: > > 2017-07-06 19:10 GMT+02:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe : > >> Actually, being able to efficiently keep a couple of GB worth of objects >> in memory, even better 10s of GB seems like an important short term

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

I didn’t mean to touch a nerve - and this was why I wrote “minor” points - but you did ask for feedback… Point noted on giving user feedback - I’d actually like to fix things, but currently its just too hard to submit fixes other than pull requests for documentation that is sitting in git hub

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

I updated the roadmap. Btw eliot I think that you should sync with clement and esteban. I'm not the guy taking decision here. We should agree on the key elements of the roadmap as well as requirements expressed by people that put money on the table. Once all the agenda/requirements/analyse is

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

2017-07-06 19:10 GMT+02:00 Sven Van Caekenberghe : > Actually, being able to efficiently keep a couple of GB worth of objects > in memory, even better 10s of GB seems like an important short term goal. I > for one don't really care for games or music. I do care about server >

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

> Only 2 minor items stick out as missing: > > 1) Continuing to improve keyboard shortcut support (its a lot better, but > not quite completed - I really miss some shortcuts, particularly the ability > to meta-tab between windows - ALT-Tab only works in some windows, and widen > selection in the

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

Tx eliot Clement edited the text so I thought that this is correct and normally yes I know these details. Just that I wrote all the comments for all the points and after 1 hour it gets boring :) On Thu, Jul 6, 2017 at 6:41 PM, Eliot Miranda wrote: > Hi Stef, > >> On Jul

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

> On 6 Jul 2017, at 18:41, Eliot Miranda wrote: > > Hi Stef, > >> On Jul 6, 2017, at 1:55 AM, Stephane Ducasse wrote: >> >> We would like to share this list with you and get your feedback and inputs. >> It will be presented and discussed

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

Hi Stef, > On Jul 6, 2017, at 1:55 AM, Stephane Ducasse wrote: > > We would like to share this list with you and get your feedback and inputs. > It will be presented and discussed again at ESUG. > > Stef on the behalf of the engineering team of the Pharo consortium. >

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

That's an exciting list - that keeps up the momentum of what you guys started (and in fact called out at ESUG 2017 in Lugano - so interesting this is a 10 year milestone). I’m pleased to see the Retina item listed as well as building on refactoring and command line support (I’ll bet others

Re: [Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

TxText removal is already done too. -- Pavel 2017-07-06 10:55 GMT+02:00 Stephane Ducasse : > We would like to share this list with you and get your feedback and inputs. > It will be presented and discussed again at ESUG. > > Stef on the behalf of the engineering team of

[Pharo-dev] Discussing the roadmap

We would like to share this list with you and get your feedback and inputs. It will be presented and discussed again at ESUG. Stef on the behalf of the engineering team of the Pharo consortium. # Pharo 7 (and 8) potential roadmap This document contains a list of actions that should be done