Dealing with incompatibility (was: Re: MIMEdatabase fix?)

changing the subject for better threading

Michael Rueger wrote:
 > > Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
 >> >> Ok I will have a look.
 >> >> I was probably silly

Well, basically the Kom package is in the old Squeak tradition of
mangling the system until it seems fit. The number and kind of
extensions all over the system make it more or less incompatible with
the MIME (and other) changes in the current Pharo image.

This is a situation we will increasingly encounter when we start to
really deliver on the promise of cleaning up the system: packages will
become incompatible to an extent that we can't -and shouldn't or rather
must not- patch around.

Polymorph is the next candidate regarding the unicode changes as it
touches the same areas of the system.

Comments?

Michael

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project


_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

slightly shorter it is the fork in the road:

are you committing to Pharo or Squeak?

So lessen or rather delay the pain for larger projects like Seaside we
could agree on postponing changes like MIME (patching it up for now) and
Unicode/ParagraphEditor until after 1.0.


Michael

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

On Feb 24, 2009, at 7:35 PM, Michael Rueger wrote:

>
> slightly shorter it is the fork in the road:
>
> are you committing to Pharo or Squeak?

I did not get that?
commited :)? to pharo?
>
>
> So lessen or rather delay the pain for larger projects like Seaside we
> could agree on postponing changes like MIME (patching it up for now)  
> and
> Unicode/ParagraphEditor until after 1.0.

I cannot reply for Unicode (even if this would be good to have that).
For MIME I would like to hear if seasider have an alternative to KOM:  
is swazoo an ok alternative?
I have the impression that we should crunch the 1.0 issues and go beta  
and open a new stream for 1.1

Stef

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
> On Feb 24, 2009, at 7:35 PM, Michael Rueger wrote:
>
>> slightly shorter it is the fork in the road:
>>
>> are you committing to Pharo or Squeak?
>
> I did not get that?
> commited :)? to pharo?

Well, yes :-)
Basically meaning we need to maintain packages explicitly for Pharo.

> For MIME I would like to hear if seasider have an alternative to KOM:  
> is swazoo an ok alternative?

The problem with MIME and Kom is that Kom changes quite a few things,
which basically require to revert most of the MIME changes.
The recursion with the mimeType method is one of them.

Michael


_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

On Feb 24, 2009, at 9:21 PM, Michael Rueger wrote:

Yes!

>> For MIME I would like to hear if seasider have an alternative to KOM:
>> is swazoo an ok alternative?
>
> The problem with MIME and Kom is that Kom changes quite a few things,
> which basically require to revert most of the MIME changes.
> The recursion with the mimeType method is one of them.

Arggh
ok now I understand.

Stef

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project