-------- Original Message --------
2016-10-28 14:12 GMT+02:00 Guille Polito <guillermopol...@gmail.com
<mailto:guillermopol...@gmail.com>>:
But the functionality is there, it's just that it is not loaded by
default.
Loading it by default implies wedding Pharo's life cycle with
OS(Sub)Process' one, and having to maintain the possibility of
dependencies to OS(Sub)Process spreading in the entire environment.
Like many of the other projects loaded by default in a Pharo image.
What is wrong with OSSubprocess or OSProcess so that they can't be
treated the same?
The fact that it is done for some projects it does not mean it is good.
Moreover, it does not mean either that we can manage it well :).
- Just ask Stef the headaches he has every time he has to do a change
that crosses many packages and some of them are developed outside the
image (do we commit everything to the inbox, or do we commit outside,
wait for integration, integrate a configuration, wait until everything
is right, not break cyclic dependencies? and so on...).
- Or just see what happened with the metacello configurations of the
refactoring browser, opal, and so on.
Also, we are starting to see how to move Pharo sources to git, and this
means we are looking at how we should design Pharo's repository so we
can smoothly collaborate and synchronize repositories using pull
requests. For example, these two last week I took some hours to evaluate
and exercise myself with git subtrees and submodules. The notes I made
from this are here:
https://github.com/guillep/PharoIntegrationProcess/wiki/Analysis-of-sub-project-storage-alternatives
What I mean, adding a package inside the image can bring also a lot of
problems to package maintainers, so doing it just because "others do it"
is not a good argument.
What is wrong in executing a simple Metacello command to load it?
The fact the image doesn't come as a one download / ready to use for
an average user?
What is an average user?
If you mean beginners, I can think of myself using a new language: when
I do not know how to do something in some new language, I google for
documentation or already done solutions (stack overflow :P). Then I
follow instructions if they are not too complicated. And installing a
library is inside my box for "not too complicated". I do and did it all
the time with maven, sbt, apt-get, npm, and it is for sure not simpler
than metacello most of the cases...
If you mean pharo users like you and me, I think then that using
Metacello should be a standard practice to manage projects and dependencies.
Now, a nice step in the middle of both worlds would be making sure that
OS(Sub)process is in the catalog.
Thierry
-------- Original Message --------
I have a love and hate relationship with Pharo
this one I will put in the hate category
You expect people to use pharo when you do not offer
functionality they come to expect from the language they
already use and not even offer an altervative, say a library
with similar command line functionality (See Scale).
On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 2:59 PM Norbert Hartl
<norb...@hartl.name <mailto:norb...@hartl.name>>
wrote:
> Am 28.10.2016 um 13:17 schrieb Dimitris Chloupis
<kilon.al...@gmail.com <mailto:kilon.al...@gmail.com>>:
>
> I just noticed that OSProcess misses from Pharo 6 image,
it was supposed to be replaced by OSSubProcess but this not in
the image either ? What we suppose to use to execute bash from
inside pharo ?
It was never in the image. You need to install it in order to
use it.
Norbert
