What about killing PharoWeb images?
Locked
12
12
What about killing PharoWeb images?
 
|
Please, don't say "NOOOOO!" immediately. Read the mail carefully, take a deep breath and think cold.
After working a couple of weeks in the Metacello configurations and now with Damien's scripts to build Dev and Web images, I came to the question: Do we really need a PharoWeb image? I will give just my opinions of why having PharoWeb images is not a good idea anymore 1) First of all, I don't like the PharoWeb name. Because it is not Web in general, it is seaside. So, in my opinion, a better name would be PharoSeaside. Maybe even new comers may think that the only alternative is seaside. You know I have nothing against Seaside and that I even use it several times. I would like to see AidaWeb images based in Pharo too. 2) Why to still have PharoWeb images if now Seaside images (at least the one click) are based in seaside ? In addition, when I develop in Seaside, I use Seaside images, not PharoWeb, and I think most people do the same. 3) Seaside images (or Lukas images for seaside) are MUCH more stable than the PharoWeb images. Why? Several reasons: 3.a) THEY know the dependencies of the packages, the versions, how to set up, the order of load, etc, NOT us. THEY are the experts in seaside, not us. 3.b) THEY really test their images before make then public. 3.c) We are "force" to release one release per month which has no sense. How says that Seaside is released once a month? That's bad because it means we are usually taking unstable versions. THEY know when a release should be done and when a release is stable or not. 4) Now I created all the Metacello configurations for the PharoDev image and I took me a lot of time. Because I am not the developer of any of those projects. So, I need to understand the dependencies, the order, the versions, etc. But why ??? If Seaside people have already done that, don't duplicate efforts. 5) The instability of PharoWeb images give to our public a bad impression. We waste all of out efforts of Pharo in that image. 6) The idea of Pharo is to be the vehicle. And that's exactly the Pharo role in the Seaside images. We don't need to build PharoWeb images. Even more, do we build PharoGlass images ? NOOOO. Why not ? Because Dale already prepare them and as HE knows much more about Glass than us, his images are better for Glass. 7) Tracking and managing issues always take time. Even analyzing a bug, say "we won't fix" and close it. With PharoWeb images we are having those kind of issues. 8) Our resources are limited. Why not to use them in more important stuff ? For example, building a better and more robust Dev image? Here is my proposal: 1) Completely remove the idea of PharoWeb image. Remove the links from the website and do not create Web images any more. 2) In http://www.pharo-project.org/pharo-download add a description explaining that now Seaside images are based in Pharo, so you can directly download that image. We can even explain a bit about seaside, and even if you want you can put a href called "PharoWeb" which links to the seaside image. However, I would rather call it "PharoSeaside". 3) Tomorrow we can have AidaWeb images based in pharo (please Janko!!) so we can just do the same and put the link to those images. 4) You may notice that Seaside images are a bit "different" than our Dev images. This is mostly due to the preferences, the theme and maybe some tools (ECompeltion instead of OCompletion, etc..). So, what I suggest is to prepare a little script that can be downloadable and those people who want a Seaside image but more "similar" to our Dev images, just run that script. So...what do you think? I would really like to hear your opinion about this. Cheers Mariano _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
On Jan 4, 2010, at 9:24 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > Please, don't say "NOOOOO!" immediately. Read the mail carefully, take a deep breath and think cold. > > After working a couple of weeks in the Metacello configurations and now with Damien's scripts to build Dev and Web images, I came to the question: Do we really need a PharoWeb image? we dont :) I agree with you. > I will give just my opinions of why having PharoWeb images is not a good idea anymore > > 1) First of all, I don't like the PharoWeb name. Because it is not Web in general, it is seaside. So, in my opinion, a better name would be PharoSeaside. Maybe even new comers may think that the only alternative is seaside. You know I have nothing against Seaside and that I even use it several times. I would like to see AidaWeb images based in Pharo too. > > 2) Why to still have PharoWeb images if now Seaside images (at least the one click) are based in seaside ? In addition, when I develop in Seaside, I use Seaside images, not PharoWeb, and I think most people do the same. > > 3) Seaside images (or Lukas images for seaside) are MUCH more stable than the PharoWeb images. Why? Several reasons: > 3.a) THEY know the dependencies of the packages, the versions, how to set up, the order of load, etc, NOT us. THEY are the experts in seaside, not us. > 3.b) THEY really test their images before make then public. > 3.c) We are "force" to release one release per month which has no sense. How says that Seaside is released once a month? That's bad because it means we are usually taking unstable versions. THEY know when a release should be done and when a release is stable or not. > > 4) Now I created all the Metacello configurations for the PharoDev image and I took me a lot of time. Because I am not the developer of any of those projects. So, I need to understand the dependencies, the order, the versions, etc. But why ??? If Seaside people have already done that, don't duplicate efforts. > > 5) The instability of PharoWeb images give to our public a bad impression. We waste all of out efforts of Pharo in that image. > > 6) The idea of Pharo is to be the vehicle. And that's exactly the Pharo role in the Seaside images. We don't need to build PharoWeb images. > Even more, do we build PharoGlass images ? NOOOO. Why not ? Because Dale already prepare them and as HE knows much more about Glass than us, his images are better for Glass. > > 7) Tracking and managing issues always take time. Even analyzing a bug, say "we won't fix" and close it. With PharoWeb images we are having those kind of issues. > > 8) Our resources are limited. Why not to use them in more important stuff ? For example, building a better and more robust Dev image? > > > > Here is my proposal: > > 1) Completely remove the idea of PharoWeb image. Remove the links from the website and do not create Web images any more. > 2) In http://www.pharo-project.org/pharo-download add a description explaining that now Seaside images are based in Pharo, so you can directly download that image. We can even explain a bit about seaside, and even if you want you can put a href called "PharoWeb" which links to the seaside image. However, I would rather call it "PharoSeaside". > 3) Tomorrow we can have AidaWeb images based in pharo (please Janko!!) so we can just do the same and put the link to those images. > 4) You may notice that Seaside images are a bit "different" than our Dev images. This is mostly due to the preferences, the theme and maybe some tools (ECompeltion instead of OCompletion, etc..). So, what I suggest is to prepare a little script that can be downloadable and those people who want a Seaside image but more "similar" to our Dev images, just run that script. > > > So...what do you think? I would really like to hear your opinion about this. > > Cheers > > Mariano > > _______________________________________________ > 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 |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
> 1) First of all, I don't like the PharoWeb name. Because it is not Web in
> general, it is seaside. So, in my opinion, a better name would be > PharoSeaside. Maybe even new comers may think that the only alternative is > seaside. You know I have nothing against Seaside and that I even use it > several times. I would like to see AidaWeb images based in Pharo too. I think at some point the images also contained AIDA. > 4) Now I created all the Metacello configurations for the PharoDev image and > I took me a lot of time. Because I am not the developer of any of those > projects. So, I need to understand the dependencies, the order, the > versions, etc. But why ??? If Seaside people have already done that, don't > duplicate efforts. There is a configuration for Seaside 3.0 (and probably also Seaside 2.8). This was probably the first configuration every written. Ask Dale. > 4) You may notice that Seaside images are a bit "different" than our Dev > images. This is mostly due to the preferences, the theme and maybe some > tools (ECompeltion instead of OCompletion, etc..). So, what I suggest is to > prepare a little script that can be downloadable and those people who want a > Seaside image but more "similar" to our Dev images, just run that script. They are different because they reflect my preferences. I basically build the Seaside images for me. If other people like and use these images, that's great of course. Lukas -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 9:45 AM, Lukas Renggli <[hidden email]> wrote:
No it doesn't. Not at least in the lasts images I have and in the scripts I have.
yes, that's true.
yes, of course. That's why I propose a little "script" that changes that to something more like our "dev" images. I basically Wait... The Seaside one click images and any other image that it is in the seaside website is not for you. I guess they are for the public. If other people like and use these _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
>> I basically
>> build the Seaside images for me. > > Wait... The Seaside one click images and any other image that it is in the > seaside website is not for you. I guess they are for the public. No, they are not designed for the public, I build the images only for me. The fact that I put them on seaside.st is because people asked us to do so and this is really easy. If people like the images and it helps them, then this is great. If you are really into building images, you should build them for YOU and not for anybody else. Otherwise, I think, they are never going to fly. Lukas -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
+1 I would definitely support concentrating on the Seaside one click images. As Mariano says, they're pretty stable, so you can get on with developing in them. From a marketing point of view, the one click images are much easier for someone who is evaluating Pharo for the first time. Also, the existing web dev is not the advertisement for Pharo that we want. There is a (very) slight complication. Lukas's recommendation for people starting a new project with JavaScript is to use JQueryUI, hence this implies Seaside 3.0. The Seaside 3.0 image on the Seaside site is not an official release: http://n4.nabble.com/2-1Using-the-One-Click-Image-tt975474.html#a975784 So the ideal solution is that that version become an official 3.0 one-click, although this was not in the Seaside plan. And maybe at the same time the Seaside team could apply (or allow to be applied) the few changes that Mariano mentioned to make that image seem more familiar. This would also make this image have the same 'look and feel' as the Seaside book. On the negative side of the ledger, there would be less testers/debuggers of the Pharo side; the problem areas of the OB/O2/Refactoring combination would not be exercised by many end users, until a stable combination could be put in the one click. Mariano, do you use the 2.8.4 or the 3.0 image? ...Stan |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
We certainly don't need the web images,
but I would like to see them stay to help with testing. If we are building
them with unstable versions of Seaside, that is a problem with the process
(loading the wrong stuff) not the concept/service (providing a Seaside-ready
version of Pharo for testing). We just finished designing a beta
program, at least three of volunteers indicated a preference for the web
image.
Bill
From:
[hidden email]
[mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mariano
Martinez Peck
Please, don't say "NOOOOO!" immediately. Read the mail carefully,
take a deep breath and think cold. Sent: Monday, January 04, 2010 3:25 AM To: Pharo Development Subject: [Pharo-project] What about killing PharoWeb images? After working a couple of weeks in the Metacello configurations and now with Damien's scripts to build Dev and Web images, I came to the question: Do we really need a PharoWeb image? I will give just my opinions of why having PharoWeb images is not a good idea anymore 1) First of all, I don't like the PharoWeb name. Because it is not Web in general, it is seaside. So, in my opinion, a better name would be PharoSeaside. Maybe even new comers may think that the only alternative is seaside. You know I have nothing against Seaside and that I even use it several times. I would like to see AidaWeb images based in Pharo too. 2) Why to still have PharoWeb images if now Seaside images (at least the one click) are based in seaside ? In addition, when I develop in Seaside, I use Seaside images, not PharoWeb, and I think most people do the same. 3) Seaside images (or Lukas images for seaside) are MUCH more stable than the PharoWeb images. Why? Several reasons: 3.a) THEY know the dependencies of the packages, the versions, how to set up, the order of load, etc, NOT us. THEY are the experts in seaside, not us. 3.b) THEY really test their images before make then public. 3.c) We are "force" to release one release per month which has no sense. How says that Seaside is released once a month? That's bad because it means we are usually taking unstable versions. THEY know when a release should be done and when a release is stable or not. 4) Now I created all the Metacello configurations for the PharoDev image and I took me a lot of time. Because I am not the developer of any of those projects. So, I need to understand the dependencies, the order, the versions, etc. But why ??? If Seaside people have already done that, don't duplicate efforts. 5) The instability of PharoWeb images give to our public a bad impression. We waste all of out efforts of Pharo in that image. 6) The idea of Pharo is to be the vehicle. And that's exactly the Pharo role in the Seaside images. We don't need to build PharoWeb images. Even more, do we build PharoGlass images ? NOOOO. Why not ? Because Dale already prepare them and as HE knows much more about Glass than us, his images are better for Glass. 7) Tracking and managing issues always take time. Even analyzing a bug, say "we won't fix" and close it. With PharoWeb images we are having those kind of issues. 8) Our resources are limited. Why not to use them in more important stuff ? For example, building a better and more robust Dev image? Here is my proposal: 1) Completely remove the idea of PharoWeb image. Remove the links from the website and do not create Web images any more. 2) In http://www.pharo-project.org/pharo-download add a description explaining that now Seaside images are based in Pharo, so you can directly download that image. We can even explain a bit about seaside, and even if you want you can put a href called "PharoWeb" which links to the seaside image. However, I would rather call it "PharoSeaside". 3) Tomorrow we can have AidaWeb images based in pharo (please Janko!!) so we can just do the same and put the link to those images. 4) You may notice that Seaside images are a bit "different" than our Dev images. This is mostly due to the preferences, the theme and maybe some tools (ECompeltion instead of OCompletion, etc..). So, what I suggest is to prepare a little script that can be downloadable and those people who want a Seaside image but more "similar" to our Dev images, just run that script. So...what do you think? I would really like to hear your opinion about this. Cheers Mariano _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
Hi Mariano,
I also agree with you. Cheers, Doru On 4 Jan 2010, at 09:24, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > Please, don't say "NOOOOO!" immediately. Read the mail carefully, > take a deep breath and think cold. > > After working a couple of weeks in the Metacello configurations and > now with Damien's scripts to build Dev and Web images, I came to the > question: Do we really need a PharoWeb image? > > I will give just my opinions of why having PharoWeb images is not a > good idea anymore > > 1) First of all, I don't like the PharoWeb name. Because it is not > Web in general, it is seaside. So, in my opinion, a better name > would be PharoSeaside. Maybe even new comers may think that the only > alternative is seaside. You know I have nothing against Seaside and > that I even use it several times. I would like to see AidaWeb images > based in Pharo too. > > 2) Why to still have PharoWeb images if now Seaside images (at least > the one click) are based in seaside ? In addition, when I develop > in Seaside, I use Seaside images, not PharoWeb, and I think most > people do the same. > > 3) Seaside images (or Lukas images for seaside) are MUCH more stable > than the PharoWeb images. Why? Several reasons: > 3.a) THEY know the dependencies of the packages, the versions, > how to set up, the order of load, etc, NOT us. THEY are the experts > in seaside, not us. > 3.b) THEY really test their images before make then public. > 3.c) We are "force" to release one release per month which has no > sense. How says that Seaside is released once a month? That's bad > because it means we are usually taking unstable versions. THEY know > when a release should be done and when a release is stable or not. > > 4) Now I created all the Metacello configurations for the PharoDev > image and I took me a lot of time. Because I am not the developer of > any of those projects. So, I need to understand the dependencies, > the order, the versions, etc. But why ??? If Seaside people have > already done that, don't duplicate efforts. > > 5) The instability of PharoWeb images give to our public a bad > impression. We waste all of out efforts of Pharo in that image. > > 6) The idea of Pharo is to be the vehicle. And that's exactly the > Pharo role in the Seaside images. We don't need to build PharoWeb > images. > Even more, do we build PharoGlass images ? NOOOO. Why not ? Because > Dale already prepare them and as HE knows much more about Glass than > us, his images are better for Glass. > > 7) Tracking and managing issues always take time. Even analyzing a > bug, say "we won't fix" and close it. With PharoWeb images we are > having those kind of issues. > > 8) Our resources are limited. Why not to use them in more important > stuff ? For example, building a better and more robust Dev image? > > > > Here is my proposal: > > 1) Completely remove the idea of PharoWeb image. Remove the links > from the website and do not create Web images any more. > 2) In http://www.pharo-project.org/pharo-download add a description > explaining that now Seaside images are based in Pharo, so you can > directly download that image. We can even explain a bit about > seaside, and even if you want you can put a href called "PharoWeb" > which links to the seaside image. However, I would rather call it > "PharoSeaside". > 3) Tomorrow we can have AidaWeb images based in pharo (please > Janko!!) so we can just do the same and put the link to those images. > 4) You may notice that Seaside images are a bit "different" than our > Dev images. This is mostly due to the preferences, the theme and > maybe some tools (ECompeltion instead of OCompletion, etc..). So, > what I suggest is to prepare a little script that can be > downloadable and those people who want a Seaside image but more > "similar" to our Dev images, just run that script. > > > So...what do you think? I would really like to hear your opinion > about this. > > Cheers > > Mariano > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project -- www.tudorgirba.com "What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?" _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
In reply to this post by Schwab,Wilhelm K
2010/1/4 Schwab,Wilhelm K <[hidden email]>
Bill: On the contrary: I don't want to have beta testers in PharoWeb and then others in Seaside one click images (which are also based in Pharo). My idea is the contrary: JOIN FORCES. If people who were now using PharoWeb image, start to use Seaside images, they will also help to test and debugs. A lot of issues reported in those images in Seaside were actually Pharo issues. In addition, is VERY uncommon that an issue of the "IDE" appears in PharoWeb but not in PharoDev. So, most of the issues in PharoWeb that are not present in PharoDev may be related to Seaside, and even probably, because we are using worng version of the packages. Cheers Mariano
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
In reply to this post by Schwab,Wilhelm K
2010/1/4 Schwab,Wilhelm K <[hidden email]>:
> We certainly don't need the web images, but I would like to see them stay to > help with testing. If we are building them with unstable versions of > Seaside, that is a problem with the process (loading the wrong stuff) not > the concept/service (providing a Seaside-ready version of Pharo for > testing). We just finished designing a beta program, at least three of > volunteers indicated a preference for the web image. > > Bill 1. *We* (who sitting here for a while), certainly don't need web images. 2. Newcomers, or entry-level youngsters, definitely will prefer a ready-to-use solutions, which easy to install, run & play with. So, +1 for keeping web images. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote: 2010/1/4 Schwab,Wilhelm K <[hidden email]>: But Igor, there is nothing easier than a double click. And seaside one click is just a double click no matter in what OS you are. They are MUCH more easier for new commers than a PharoWeb image where they have to download the VM, the sources and the image.
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
Em 04/01/2010 06:24, Mariano Martinez Peck < [hidden email] > escreveu:
> Please, don't say "NOOOOO!" immediately. Read the mail carefully, > take a deep breath and think cold. > After working a couple of weeks in the Metacello configurations and > now with Damien's scripts to build Dev and Web images, I came to the > question: Do we really need a PharoWeb image? > I will give just my opinions of why having PharoWeb images is not > a good idea anymore [snipped] On the whole I appreciate and agree with the reasoning. > > Here is my proposal: > 1) Completely remove the idea of PharoWeb image. Remove the links > from the website and do not create Web images any more. +1 > 2) In http://www.pharo-project.org/pharo-download add a description > explaining that now Seaside images are based in Pharo, so you can > directly download that image. We can even explain a bit about > seaside, and even if you want you can put a href called "PharoWeb" > which links to the seaside image. However, I would rather call it > "PharoSeaside". I think here we have to work hard to stress this fact since IIUC the /pièce de résistance/ for Pharo is having all production work done by Seaside. > 3) Tomorrow we can have AidaWeb images based in > pharo (please Janko!!) so we can just do the same and put the link > to those images. While I'm fond of the idea on having AidaWeb very soon as possible, I also think we should put ourselves in Janko's shoes and understand that he'll need to master Metacelllo to arrive at the packaging. . . > 4) You may notice that Seaside images are a bit "different" than our > Dev images. This is mostly due to the preferences, the theme and > maybe some tools (ECompeltion instead of OCompletion, etc..). So, > what I suggest is to prepare a little script that can be > downloadable and those people who want a Seaside image but more > "similar" to our Dev images, just run that script. I would postpone the publishing of these kind of scripts for a much more stable Pharo and Metacello (or packaging solution ensuing), otherwise you'll have the same work as testing the scripts means creating and testing the packages!! > > So...what do you think? I would really like to hear your opinion > about this. my 0.01999999.... -- Cesar Rabak _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 5:22 PM, <[hidden email]> wrote: Em 04/01/2010 06:24, Mariano Martinez Peck < [hidden email] > escreveu: I am not sure if I understood you correctly. Of course that supports Seaside is one of the most important task in Pharo, but not the only one. I don't know what do you mean with production, but I know few "production" application running in Pharo without Seaside. As Marcus or Gary for example. I really would like Pharo to be the vehicle for all of them: Seaside, AidaWeb, GemTools, Moose, etc.
Yes, maybe. But that's not in our discussion. I mean, suppose I don't care how Janko builds his images, I really would like that to be also "PharoWeb". So, it that case we just add one link more to our website: "Pharo Web with Seaside" , "Pharo Web with AidaWeb" , "Pharo Client for Gemstone", etc...
Good point. If you want we can achieve that later. Even for 1.1. But at least, for the moment, for the newcomers, I doesn't cost anything a little script to at least set the preferences and theme we use in PharoDev (this has nothing to do with the Package Managment). Thanks for giving me your opinion Carlos. Cheers Mariano
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
In reply to this post by Lukas Renggli
----- "Lukas Renggli" <[hidden email]> wrote: | > 4) Now I created all the Metacello configurations for the PharoDev | image and | > I took me a lot of time. Because I am not the developer of any of | those | > projects. So, I need to understand the dependencies, the order, the | > versions, etc. But why ??? If Seaside people have already done that, | don't | > duplicate efforts. | | There is a configuration for Seaside 3.0 (and probably also Seaside | 2.8). This was probably the first configuration every written. Ask | Dale. Yes Seaside3.0 was one of the original motivations behind Metacello:) There are Seaside3.0, Seaside2.8 and Pier (for Seaside2.8) configurations in the Metacello Repository and these were built based on information Lukas, so they should match pretty closely the web image content. I agree with the notion of one-click for ease of getting started with a particular framework/project. In the GLASS effort I've often outstripped the one-click images (and appliances) and run into support issues as a consequence. Once a developer is comfortable with the technology then they are likely to want to build their own image and if the one-click was built with a know configuration, then the developer has a reasonable chance of duplicating the code in his/her custom image. Dale _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
----- [hidden email] wrote: | > 3) Tomorrow we can have AidaWeb images based in | > pharo (please Janko!!) so we can just do the same and put the link | > to those images. | | While I'm fond of the idea on having AidaWeb very soon as possible, I | also think we should put ourselves in Janko's shoes and understand | that he'll need to master Metacelllo to arrive at the packaging. . . Being able to easily load AidaWeb into GemStone was one of the other motivations for Metacello:) My todo list for Pharo, includes building a configuration for AidaWeb that will load AidaWeb into GLASS or Pharo (with feedback from Janko). I also plan incorporate Julian's work on Pier2 for Seaside3.0 into the Pier configuration (the current Pier configuration in MetacelloRepository is for Seaside2.8 only) Dale _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
In reply to this post by Dale
On Mon, Jan 4, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Dale Henrichs <[hidden email]> wrote:
This is really cool. And just because of this I think that we don't need the PharoWeb image, as you have the following options already: - Use metacello configuration by yourself. It is just one line of code and we can even explain in how to do it in the website. Even more, you can load that conf in a Pharo Dev, at that's all :) - Use Seaside one click - Use Lukas script.
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
In reply to this post by Dale
good!
We need a good collection of good packages :) > > Being able to easily load AidaWeb into GemStone was one of the other motivations for Metacello:) > > My todo list for Pharo, includes building a configuration for AidaWeb that will load AidaWeb into GLASS or Pharo (with feedback from Janko). > > I also plan incorporate Julian's work on Pier2 for Seaside3.0 into the Pier configuration (the current Pier configuration in MetacelloRepository is for Seaside2.8 only) > > Dale > > _______________________________________________ > 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 |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
In reply to this post by Lukas Renggli
Lukas Renggli <renggli@...> writes:
> If you are really into building images, you should build them for YOU > and not for anybody else. Otherwise, I think, they are never going to > fly. +1 --AA _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 12:34 AM, Adrian Kuhn <[hidden email]> wrote:
But the concern about this emails was final users, maybe even beginners and new comers. Most of us (who have some time with Pharo) use our own build images, but they do not. --AA _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: What about killing PharoWeb images?
|
|
My big concern is that either testing of
Pharo will suffer (things that are made difficult tend not to happen), or that a
bunch of us will end up with ad-hoc build processes rather than having it done
in one place with a chance of getting it right.
Bill
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Mariano Martinez Peck Sent: Tuesday, January 05, 2010 5:02 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] What about killing PharoWeb images? On Tue, Jan 5, 2010 at 12:34 AM, Adrian Kuhn <[hidden email]> wrote:
But the concern about this emails was final users, maybe even beginners and new comers. Most of us (who have some time with Pharo) use our own build images, but they do not. --AA _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Developers
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |