MIMEdatabase fix?

>> I have problems to understand why this would be not reasonable that
>> people load a give kom version for seaside on squeak
>> and one for seaside on pharo.
>
> Loading is one thing. What bothers we more is the maintenance  
> situation.
> Let's face it, there are far too resources behind something as  
> important
> as Kom. Making a fork of it cuts these resources in half.
>
> Maintenance is not doing a quick fix now so that it loads. Maintenance
> is taking care of something for several years (!) to come, fixing  
> issues
> as they arrive, being there and responding. Removing time from other
> activities instead of finding excuses.

> Philippe Marschall wrote:
>> Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>> I have problems to understand why this would be not reasonable that
>>> people load a give kom version for seaside on squeak
>>> and one for seaside on pharo.
>>
>> Loading is one thing. What bothers we more is the maintenance  
>> situation.
>> Let's face it, there are far too resources behind something as  
>> important
>> as Kom. Making a fork of it cuts these resources in half.
>
> Hmm, I think most of the discussion is simply a misunderstanding, I'm
> not forking anything.
>
> With my changes to Pharo (which of course first need to be  
> integrated),
> the changed (not forked!) version of Kom and the few changes for  
> Seaside
> (which need to be integrated) there is no need for a fork!!!
>
> Those versions should work on both Squeak and Pharo.
>
> It's not monkey patching, none of the packages touch other stuff any
> more than they did before. I just changed Kom so its monkey patching  
> now
> works on both Seaside and Pharo.
>
> And that's where I need you help testing.
>
> Michael
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

>
> the changed (not forked!) version of Kom and the few changes for  
> Seaside
> (which need to be integrated) there is no need for a fork!!!
>
> Those versions should work on both Squeak and Pharo.
>
> It's not monkey patching, none of the packages touch other stuff any
> more than they did before. I just changed Kom so its monkey patching  
> now
> works on both Seaside and Pharo.
>
> And that's where I need you help testing.
>
> Michael
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

> Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>> I have problems to understand why this would be not reasonable that
>> people load a give kom version for seaside on squeak
>> and one for seaside on pharo.
>
> Loading is one thing. What bothers we more is the maintenance situation.
> Let's face it, there are far too resources behind something as important
> as Kom. Making a fork of it cuts these resources in half.
>
> Maintenance is not doing a quick fix now so that it loads. Maintenance
> is taking care of something for several years (!) to come, fixing issues
> as they arrive, being there and responding. Removing time from other
> activities instead of finding excuses.
>
>
> Cheers
> Philippe
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

>>> With my changes to Pharo (which of course first need to be
>>> integrated),
>>
>> I will integrate them this evening.
>
> A quick test with loading the following packages into both the latest
> Pharo and a Squeak 3.9.1 image seemed to work :-)
>
> from http://www.squeaksource.com/KomHttpServer
> DynamicBindings-gc.7
> NamedProcess-RJT.2
> KomServices-gc.19
>
> from http://squeaksource.com/PharoInbox
> KomHttpServer-michael_rueger.45
>
> from http://squeaksource.com/Seaside
> Seaside2.8a1-pmm.583
>
> Michael
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

> Philippe Marschall wrote:
>> Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
>>> I have problems to understand why this would be not reasonable that
>>> people load a give kom version for seaside on squeak
>>> and one for seaside on pharo.
>> Loading is one thing. What bothers we more is the maintenance situation.
>> Let's face it, there are far too resources behind something as important
>> as Kom. Making a fork of it cuts these resources in half.
>
> Hmm, I think most of the discussion is simply a misunderstanding, I'm
> not forking anything.
>
> With my changes to Pharo (which of course first need to be integrated),
> the changed (not forked!) version of Kom and the few changes for Seaside
> (which need to be integrated) there is no need for a fork!!!
>
> Those versions should work on both Squeak and Pharo.

>
>
>> It's not monkey patching, none of the packages touch other stuff any
>> more than they did before. I just changed Kom so its monkey  
>> patching now
>> works on both Seaside and Pharo.
>>
>> And that's where I need you help testing.
>
> I did a short test with Seaside 2.8 and Squeak 3.9 and it seems to  
> work.
>
> Cheers
> Philippe
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>

>>> Those versions should work on both Squeak and Pharo.
>
> Cool
> Excellent
>>
>> Very well then. Can you contact Giovanni to have your changes
>> integrated at:
>>
>> http://www.squeaksource.com/KomHttpServer.html
>
> Giovanni we need your help so get the changes that are in the PharoInbox
> repository on
> squeaksource in KomHttpServer.
>
> Can you help us?
>