Looks like i missed that discussion..
As to me, its not really relevant what name you pick for it,
its important what and how much effort you will put in it :)
On 17 May 2010 22:16, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
> true
>
> On May 17, 2010, at 9:04 PM, Michael Roberts wrote:
>
>> way back then there was
true
On May 17, 2010, at 9:04 PM, Michael Roberts wrote:
> way back then there was a thread about not calling Pharo what we
> should not call it but we have as a group consistently failed to
> do this. i would suggest that if people can't drop using *it*, then we
> have to give up. it is ver
way back then there was a thread about not calling Pharo what we
should not call it but we have as a group consistently failed to
do this. i would suggest that if people can't drop using *it*, then we
have to give up. it is very difficult doing such brand management in
an online group. we shou
ok ok, I surrender :)
On 2010-05-15 07:22:51 -0300, Michael Roberts
said:
You might disagree but it's what we decided. We should keep different
version tags so that we can use different update streams (sections
within) in the future.
Cheers mike
On Friday, May 14, 2010, Stéphane Ducasse
You might disagree but it's what we decided. We should keep different
version tags so that we can use different update streams (sections
within) in the future.
Cheers mike
On Friday, May 14, 2010, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
> I do not have strong feeling about that ;)
> Just busy :)
>
> On May 14,
Hi,
This was decided a long time ago:
- PharoCore is PharoCore
- PharoDev is Pharo (and from now on, perhaps it would be great to not
talk about PharoDev anymore)
So, Pharo is PharoDev. In fact, only for very few people will
PharoCore be interesting. For most, Pharo(Dev) it is the interesti
On 14 May 2010 21:36, Torsten Bergmann wrote:
>>I mean "pharo" is "pharo core"
>
> Is Linux only the Kernel? No.
> You have a Linux version (distro) and the kernel version.
>
>>and "pharo dev" is just pharo+packages loaded
>
> Pharo-dev is what is distributed by default and typically
> called "Pha
>I mean "pharo" is "pharo core"
Is Linux only the Kernel? No.
You have a Linux version (distro) and the kernel version.
>and "pharo dev" is just pharo+packages loaded
Pharo-dev is what is distributed by default and typically
called "Pharo". Similar to the platform and loaded packages
in Ecli
I do not have strong feeling about that ;)
Just busy :)
On May 14, 2010, at 5:24 PM, Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
> May I disagree with that? I mean "pharo" is "pharo core", and "pharo dev" is
> just pharo+packages loaded, so I don't see the point on declaring it a
> different version.
>
> On 2010
May I disagree with that? I mean "pharo" is "pharo core", and "pharo
dev" is just pharo+packages loaded, so I don't see the point on
declaring it a different version.
On 2010-05-14 09:04:31 -0300, Mariano Martinez Peck
said:
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Esteban Lorenzano
wrote:
H
On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
> Hi,
> Why SystemVersion current version answers 'PharoCore1.0' and not just
> 'Pharo1.0'?
>
>
Maybe to distinguish from PharoDev?
PharoCore answers -> 'PharoCore1.0'
PharoDev (a.k.a Pharo) answers -> 'Pharo-1.0'
Cheers,
> Esteban
>
Hi,
Why SystemVersion current version answers 'PharoCore1.0' and not just
'Pharo1.0'?
Cheers,
Esteban
___
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
12 matches
Mail list logo
