20 Jan
2014
20 Jan
'14
10:51 a.m.
Hi,
First, I am happy to see that these efforts get noticed :). This is just
the most visible part of the tremendous work happening in Moose.
Then, I think it is indeed important to start approaching the problem of
the direction of the IDE explicitly. Ideally, we should indeed have one
strong and novel IDE. I think there is great potential there.
Cheers,
Doru
On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 11:04 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr>wrote;wrote:
On 19 Jan 2014, at 22:58, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com>
wrote:
Keep in mind that we need to take care:
the problem back than was that we
had actually not a good situation: we developed one image, but then people
used other tools
when they downloaded the final version.
This means that details never got fixed and improved: why put a lot of
effort into getting the details in the browser correct if everyone will use
another browser?
And that other browser did not see a lot of work, either, because it was
not part of the development effort of Pharo itself.
It was actually quite bad. We need to really take care to not have that
again.
And we do *not* have the manpower to manage two sets of tools anyway.
Marcus
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
This is gorgeous.
The Moose distribution of Pharo looks like to be better suitable for
code
development than the vanilla one. This makes me remember the
Development image of Damien.