[squeak-dev] facelifting the trunk?

Hi,

would it not be an interesting idea to make Vassili Bykov's facelift
patches the standard in the trunk? I, for one, really like the lean
appearance of facelifted images.

Obviously, the patches would first have to be made available to the
public, which they are currently not. After that, there might be
issues (Robert Krahn just tells me Polymorph might object to being
facelifted).

Still, the overall look would benefit, at least in my opinion. Maybe
it's even possible to make this a preference ... but the patches apply
some deep changes IIRC.

Best,

Michael

No objection, per-se. Just likely to be some conflicting methods...

Regards, Gary

----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Haupt" <[hidden email]>
To: "The general-purpose Squeak developers list"
<[hidden email]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 15, 2009 2:16 PM
Subject: [squeak-dev] facelifting the trunk?

Hi Michael,

Michael Haupt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> would it not be an interesting idea to make Vassili Bykov's facelift
> patches the standard in the trunk? I, for one, really like the lean
> appearance of facelifted images.
>  

Can you send a link?

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

Hi Juan,

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Juan Vuletich <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> appearance of facelifted images.
>
> Can you send a link?

just look at any Newspeak image. For convenience, I have attached a
screenshot of a facelifted Squeak image I have on my machine.

Best,

Michael

Michael Haupt wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 3:59 PM, Juan Vuletich <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> appearance of facelifted images.
>> Can you send a link?
>
> just look at any Newspeak image. For convenience, I have attached a
> screenshot of a facelifted Squeak image I have on my machine.

Looks good. I bit Windozy for my taste but nicely calm otherwise. If you
can get Vasily to release these tweaks as MIT, that would be great.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

On 2009-09-15 15:16, Michael Haupt wrote: I would like if the functionality improved as well.
Has anybody tested the Diff Tools ?
They seem really nice

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3236/2377749255_3900e83832.jpg


Karl

Hi Michael,

Michael Haupt wrote:
Thanks.

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

Hi Eliot,

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 6:08 PM, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote:
> It's under the Cadence Open Source license which is a rebranded Apache.  Is
> that unacceptable?

is there *any* chance of relicensing it for the purpose of being
integrated with Squeak? (I know I should ask Vassili directly. Maybe
he reads this. I'll ask him all the same.)

Best,

Michael

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 7:06 PM, Karl Ramberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Has anybody tested the Diff Tools ?
> They seem really nice
>
> http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3236/2377749255_3900e83832.jpg

Diff Tools is part of Polymorph and thus already integrated in
squeak-devs for a very long time now:
http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st/Smalltalk/squeak-dev. Pharo has
it also: http://pharo-project.org/

--
Damien Cassou
http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st

"Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them
popular by not having them." James Iry

re Vassili's facelift GUI

Bert wrote:
> For Squeak, yes. We decided to only accept contributions under MIT.
> Reopening that discussion would open a whole can of worms I'm afraid.

A link please?   (To the decision, not to the discussion.)

My recollection is that the "MIT only" restriction is for
contributions to Squeak.  I have not yet noticed mention of a
restriction for artefacts harvested from outside the project.

On 16.09.2009, at 00:19, David Corking wrote:

> Bert wrote:
>> For Squeak, yes. We decided to only accept contributions under MIT.
>> Reopening that discussion would open a whole can of worms I'm afraid.
>
> A link please?   (To the decision, not to the discussion.)
>
> My recollection is that the "MIT only" restriction is for
> contributions to Squeak.

Right.

> I have not yet noticed mention of a
> restriction for artefacts harvested from outside the project.

I don't follow - we are discussing including this in Squeak, aren't we?

- Bert -

David Corking  wrote:
> Bert wrote:
> > For Squeak, yes. We decided to only accept contributions under MIT.
> > Reopening that discussion would open a whole can of worms I'm afraid.
>
> A link please?   (To the decision, not to the discussion.)
>
> My recollection is that the "MIT only" restriction is for
> contributions to Squeak.

Exactly.

>  I have not yet noticed mention of a
> restriction for artefacts harvested from outside the project.

The subject of this thread is "facelifting the trunk", so we are talking
about taking code harvested from outside the project and transforming it
into a contribution to Squeak. If the discussion were instead about
having this as a loadable project then the license would not be such an
issue.

-- Jecel

I kind of hope we can get Polymorph in, and then we can go crazy
making Polymorph themes.

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 6:02 PM, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote:


--
Ron

Bert Freudenberg  wrote:

>> I have not yet noticed mention of a
>> restriction for artefacts harvested from outside the project.
>
> I don't follow - we are discussing including this in Squeak, aren't we?

If I write code myself, and submit it to the Inbox, I have to complete
a contributors agreement and license it as MIT.

If the community agrees to get code from somewhere else (in this case
from Newspeak) then that code may have an MIT-compatible license.  My
question is: does Squeak have a policy to say whether such foreign
code may be committed to the trunk?

David Corking wrote:
> If the community agrees to get code from somewhere else (in this case
> from Newspeak) then that code may have an MIT-compatible license.  My
> question is: does Squeak have a policy to say whether such foreign
> code may be committed to the trunk?

All source code committed to the trunk must be available as MIT. In
other words, it is not acceptable to commit code to the trunk that's not
available under MIT. No exceptions.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

Andreas Raab wrote:
> David Corking wrote:
>> If the community agrees to get code from somewhere else (in this case
>> from Newspeak) then that code may have an MIT-compatible license.  My
>> question is: does Squeak have a policy to say whether such foreign
>> code may be committed to the trunk?
>
> All source code committed to the trunk must be available as MIT. In
> other words, it is not acceptable to commit code to the trunk that's not
> available under MIT. No exceptions.

PS. I realize that the reasoning may not be obvious so here it is
spelled out explicitly: Basically, we don't want to make judgments about
what licenses are compatible with what other licenses. We're not
lawyers, we have really no clue what the result of combining different
licenses is. We need a simple story so the quid pro quo is: If you want
your stuff in the trunk you must make it available as MIT, so that our
story remains simple and consistent and keeps the lawyers off our
collective behinds. If you can't do that, well, tough luck, you might
want to think ahead the next time you choose a license.

Cheers,
   - Andreas