On Sun, Nov 6, 2016 at 6:22 PM Stephan Eggermont <step...@stack.nl> wrote:
> Kilon wrote: > > If you really want to embrace Github , kill Smalltalkhub > > We are not close to doing that. We'll need > Monticello support indefinitely, and at least a few years two-way. And > that assumes we automatically migrate all open projects. > > First we need good workflows that also work for complex projects. That > includes cross-platform projects like Seaside > > Stephan > I remember the first time I asked about Pharo and Git maybe 3 years ago , you are one of the first to tell me exactly what you saying now, Pharo is not close to be ready for Git. My first assumption was that you were wrong but respecting your experience as a Smalltalk coder I decided to not fully embrace Git and instead continue to have my project both in Git and in StHub. Few months in this experiment and I confirmed what I suspecting all along that you were wrong. Git requirements is basically non existent, it mainly works with text files and with less support for binary files. Pharo does not need anything but text files to be ready for Git. We had text files since forever with fileouts and became more convenient with filetree. You are also wrong about Seaside kind of projects. Its actually ironic to talk about complex projects when Git itself was made by the creator of Linux and the Linux kernel developers have been using it for the Linux kernel for ages. Actually one of the reasons why Linux created Git was because he was disappointed how slow and cumbersome SVN was with big and complex projects and to this day Git's speed and ability to handle enormous complexity with ease is what makes it first choice for many projects and probably the most popular VCS. Aa such not only SmalltalkHub has been an extremely poor alternativre to Github , its claims like yours that keep the Pharo community using tools that extremely limited , buggy and close to nowhere as Smalltalky enough. I am not talking about here just for Smalltalkhub but also Monticello. That weird Gui thing , that is just weird and sometimes is also weird. If however here we talk personal taste, if people want to recreate tools that exist outside the pharo image because they prefer to stay inside the pharo image , I am not against that but then I never criticised personal taste. Its a free world after all. Tools like Iceberg are more than welcomed as long as I can easily remove them from my image. Personally the only toolset I will be implementing will be a tool to completely bypass monticello and filetree and instead mark classes for export and code will be exported most likely in a fileout format automatically each time I hit accept in the browser.
