Since I note a lack of other responses, I'll just say I'm not up to
date enough at the moment to have a strong opinion. But wherever code
is moved, we'll need to make sure that documentation is updated, other
platforms can still access it, and build scripts, etc. still work.
Julian
On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 9:05 PM, Johan Brichau <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> What do the Seaside developers think about migrating?
>
> Go to SmalltalkHUB ?
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
>> From: stephane ducasse <
[hidden email]>
>> Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] [Pharo-users] the future of squeaksource
>> Date: 8 May 2013 09:50:29 GMT+02:00
>> To: A friendly place where any question about pharo is welcome <
[hidden email]>
>> Cc: Pharo Development <
[hidden email]>
>> Reply-To:
[hidden email]
>>
>>
>> On May 7, 2013, at 5:19 PM, Andrei Vasile Chis <
[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Given that SmalltalkHub is now stable we were considering to discontinue SqueakSource.
>>> Our idea is to provide a grace period of a couple of months to allow the current active users to migrate their projects to the new service and then simply put squeaksource in read-only mode (simply exposing the directory structure and allowing downloads).
>>>
>>> What do you think about it ?
>>> Are there any good reasons to still keep SqueakSource alive?
>>
>> Keep it alive so that we can slowly migrate. Because migrating takes a lot of time.
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> The SCG Team
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> seaside-dev mailing list
>
[hidden email]
>
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/seaside-dev_______________________________________________
seaside-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/seaside-dev
Locked
