19 Jul
2016
19 Jul
'16
11:38 a.m.
Hi,
I think we are talking about two different things.
The GT interface is not for people that want to click, but for people that want to
program. Not the same audience, and I would certainly not use it for products dedicated to
people that do not want to program. We need a better infrastructure for end-user products,
and what we have now is not enough. I think that is not a Moose problem, but a Pharo one,
and it can only change with Bloc/Brick.
Also, we are talking about the development version of Moose, not the stable one. The
development version is not meant to be stable (even if it turns out to be stable enough).
For the Moose 5.1/Pharo 4 version, we had a couple of patches that happen after the
release, and they got integrated in the respective configurations. I think that shows that
we can do that if we really need to.
About a Famix fork: could it be that you are referring to extensions to Famix that are
specific to the languages that you are parsing, and not for the common parts? If not, I
would love to hear where the issues are and how we can correct them, because I did not see
public issues that were not integrated in quite some time.
In any case, I am happy that you are interested in investing in the modeling parts (Fame
and Famix). For example, it would be great to have traits deeply used. I would be happy to
work with people in any direction. Just make it public and let’s solve real problems.
Cheers,
Doru
On Jul 19, 2016, at 12:30 AM, stepharo
<stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote:
Le 19/7/16 à 01:32, Tudor Girba a écrit :
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"Things happen when they happen,
not when you talk about them happening."
Hi Stef,
I am sorry you feel this way. I did not expedite you, only we had exactly these
conversations before.
You see when I sent a not funny and cool mail this is not for
fun and I monitor myself. When the counter is getting
too high then it means that I should change because there is a mismatch between me and
others.
It can come from me or from others the result is the same: change.
Like now, the issue was that if we work on the
last version of Pharo the code will be unstable and we will get problems. It turns out
that we did not. Where are the signs you see this as being problematic?
Do you
think that we can ship a product with a VM that has hiccups?
Or that does not collect enough garbage?
In addition Synectique does not use any of the User Interface of Moose (not GT at all -
because clients found the interface not sexy and because they also want light clients).
Net result:
- no roassal because it has no decent graph algo (so no advantage over Javascript
code)
- no GT
- Pharo as a server.
I'm not sure that there is something to learn from this but this is the reality.
The sad part is that I'm not sure that even if we ask privately we will get the real
reasons because there is not need to hurt people.
In fact the problem is the opposite. Right now,
Moose is unstable because we do not have the infrastructure and man power to develop in
Pharo 5 and 6 at the same time, and we get conflicting changes especially given that GT
are central to both Pharo and Moose. We had the same issue last year. So, right now we are
in consolidation, but afterwards, we have to move on.
As for selling, if I understand correctly, Synectique builds on the version of Moose that
is stable (5.1), which was released about 1 year ago. Now, it is one year later and we
should release again.
I really do not see the problem.
I would not sell products based on an alpha
version of Pharo because people in alpha should have the freedom to break things
and take time to fix them. Now if other people do not care about such aspects what can I
say.
We will work on fame replacement and more deep things so we will see if we can get a
consensus inside moose
else it will be outside. We will try and if it does not work we will work on our own
core.
Stef
Cheers,
Doru
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev On Jul 18, 2016, at 3:55 PM, stepharo
<stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote:
Ok doru. I see that there are no real discussion possible. Sadly Moose became more and
more an ui experimentation platform
versus an analysis platform (this is long time ago that I did not see new analyses beside
MooseChef).
Late 2016, we will have an engineer to work on the core of Moose (meta model and more)
and I will have to think what we will do because
I do not think that I'm really welcomed in the Moose system anymore. Each time I sent
a mail I feel like an idiot telling something wrong.
It is ok and it is probably time for me to step back from Moose and build something else
with less strings attached.
Too bad I thought that Moose was to make sure that people can sell product around it.
Stef
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"In a world where everything is moving ever faster,
one might have better chances to win by moving slower."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev Hi,
We will release Moose soon. The main open issue is the often crashing Roassal, and as
there was some new input recently, I decided to wait a bit for the release.
So, Moose 6.0 release will be on top of Pharo 5.0. After that, the development version of
Moose will move to Pharo 6.0.
Cheers,
Doru
> On Jul 8, 2016, at 1:20 PM, Usman Bhatti <usman.bhatti(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Currently, moose provides two possibilities: stable for pharo release and development
for pharo alpha. We have builds for both on the jenkins.
>
> On Fri, Jul 8, 2016 at 12:13 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote:
> But why Moose should be using an alpha version of Pharo?
>
> Some people need stable versions of Moose, so moving to Pharo 60 is the best way to
make them fork.
>
> I do not know what ussman thinks about that, but I do not think that it is wise to
ship Pharo60 to synectique clients
>
> so if this is the case I will advise them to fork everything to be able to use Pharo
50.
>
> Now people should not complain after that it is difficult to make people share what
there are doing.
>
> Stef
>
>
> Le 29/6/16 à 00:24, Alexandre Bergel a écrit :
> Hi!
>
> Does the moose build uses Pharo 6? It does not look like…
> How to make Moose loads in Pharo 6?
>
> Alexandre
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.tudorgirba.com
www.feenk.com
"Every thing has its own flow."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev