On 26 October 2011 02:20, David T. Lewis <
[hidden email]> wrote:
> If you prefer to just commit your changes to the Coral repo, I will
> do my best to integrate them back into the SqS/OSProcess and CommandShell
> repositories. It might be that I spend more time working with the older
> images than you do, so it may easier if we do it that way, but either
> way is fine by me.
That might be the best way to do. I already have cold feet about
changing code that is not mine like that, so if I also have to worry
about compatibility, I will not go anywhere.
For Coral I will rely on metacello configurations so I can easily
commit code that works for me and update the #development version,
then you're free to smooth things for old images and make proper
releases. I really don't want to end up with a fork, so tell me if I
write crap :)
A bit of a roadmap:
- I'd like to group in OSProcess all that pertains to launching and
interacting with child processes, particularly PipeableOSProcess and
maybe a couple other classes it needs.
- there are tests about forking squeak that don't pass on my machine,
apparently because they rely on X11. Should they be marked as expected
failures ?
- if possible I'd like to simplify the architecture (or push you in
this direction ;) From reading the code I feel like there are many
convenience methods but the core ones are not completely orthogonal or
complete… No actual examples at the moment but I can make a list of
what surprises me if you like.
--
Damien Pollet
type less, do more [ | ]
http://people.untyped.org/damien.pollet_______________________________________________
Pharo-coral mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-coral
Locked
