Re:

Paolo,

What are the licensing problems with OpenSSL?

I will keep an eye on GNU Smalltalk, and pay some more attention to
licensing.  Sadly, you appear to be missing enough that I will probably
have to pass for now.  I doubt I have enough time to try to run an
effort to build a GUI, though I would be able to help with it.  The
dowry would materialize later in the form of tools that I would produce
as a result of my porting efforts.

If modularization of Squeak succeeds, it might make sense to try to fix
a few show stoppers and then try to load what I need on top of it.

To put this in perspective, note that I have been evaluating portable
Smalltalk options for several years to protect my work.  IMHO, the trend
in Windows is downward on most metrics that matter to me.  If it
continues, I will get more willing to entertain heroic measures to
escape with my code in tact.  For now, I am still in a mode of looking
for a path of least resistance.  Again, it is a business decision as
well as a passion for Smalltalk.

Things like Vista and Windows Genuine Annoyance (or is it
advantage??<g>)  have raised my sense of urgency .  I also recently
dealt with a run of hardware failures which lead me to use Ubuntu and
Knoppix with a mission to check hardware and recover some data (got the
few files I really wanted).  For some reason, Ubuntu stayed on one of
the machines:)   Around that same time, I had to re-install Windows to
remove a stubborn Novell client, and went though the usual install, then
apply a service pack, then hunt for drivers, then turn off all the junk
I don't want, and the contrast with Linux was a real shock.  Some of
that wasted time really should go into breaking the remaining
dependencies on Windows.  I also keep hoping that Object Arts will do it
for me with a cross-platform sibling to Dolphin.

Back to GNU, is there a good way to monitor your progress?

Bill




Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
University of Florida
Department of Anesthesiology
PO Box 100254
Gainesville, FL 32610-0254

Email: [hidden email]
Tel: (352) 846-1285
FAX: (352) 392-7029

>>> Paolo Bonzini <[hidden email]> 07/11/07 11:18 AM >>>

> Thanks for your replies.  The only disagreement we have so far would
> over the "vs." aspect of my decision.  From my perspective, it is a
big
> decision with lots of lost work if I make a bad choice, and I must
> approach it like a business decision (which in fact it is).  Beyond
> that, sure, live and let write software.

Fair enough.

> Database connectivity: MySQL is the one to do :)  It would also be
nice
> to have ODBC capability.

Yes, MySQL+ODBC (and possibly Postgres) are enough.

> SSL - that's ok, Squeak does not really have them either, though I
> suspect it will via the crypto group.  There is always stunnel too,
> though I prefer to have zero chance of configuration mistakes leading
to
> use of clear text communications.  There is always OpenSSL and FFI.

Yes, though there are licensing problems and I'd prefer GNUTLS with FFI.

    But we got the idea.

> Seaside?  That means you are doing continuations.

Sure I am.

>  That won't be the case, but I do need to ensure that I can: (1)
create
> and use software for commercial purposes; (2) be able sell/license
said
> software.  I have no problem with giving away improvements to the
system
> itself

Fine.  If your software is not itself an improvement to the system, you
can license it as you prefer.

> I strongly recommend finishing the graphical environment.  The
essential
> components for the IDE are the browser, inspector, notifier (ok so
far)
> and (ouch!!!) debugger.

As I said, this is a volunteer project.  Current volunteers are not
focusing on the GUI, but they do not stop new volunteers to do so.  So,
you can recommend finishing the GUI but you have to put your own energy
into that. :-)

That said, it's not a huge task.  A surprisingly big part of the
debugger is not necessarily tied to graphical operation.  There is a
debugger -- it is slow and has also bitrotted with some probability, but

it is there.  And there is a textual MiniDebugger, which shares some
code (cut'n'paste) with the real thing.  It would be cool to refactor
the common code into a debugging package.

> The latter is really the star of the show, and
> (forgive me) you do not have a complete Smalltalk system without it.

Agreed.

> The Dolphin approach is to
> force the user to define package boundaries; we get by just fine w/o a
> change sorter.

We do the same in GNU Smalltalk.  Package boundaries however are
implicit in "what the files define".  You would need a tool to make
boundaries explicit, i.e. to associate a class with the file it lives
in.  What Dolphin does is probably a good model.

Paolo



_______________________________________________
help-smalltalk mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/help-smalltalk