On 11/8/16 11:04 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
On 7 November 2016 at 14:28, stepharo <steph...@free.fr
<mailto:steph...@free.fr>> wrote:
[ ... ]
And this one I don't understand. A smooth, git / iceberg oriented
transition over Monticello/Metacello is perfectly doable... As
Dale explained. A nice Iceberg gui reworking / making git usable
is perfect.
But why make the transition so hard? You get Stef angry on a
Sunday morning because he can't find things anymore... even if he
is a strong proponent of the strategy he complains about ;)
No my point was not that.
My point is that it is important to pay attention and not to add
more noise than necessary. Let us take the time and move alltogether.
If you want to get somewhere with this story, you don't want to wait
till everything will be ready.
Transition will never start unless you force users to enter the
minefield and let them clear the mines for you. Step by step. Many
will blow themselves up, while some will manage to pass unhurt..
Because else, it will be always a minefield between you and the
destination of your journey :)
I think that at the early stages of the transition you have to support
both approaches ... when the new tools are in place and stabilized then
one can consider ... the transition has already started so this is not a
case where you need to force folks to change, but a case where you need
to support the folks who choose to change ... it can be relatively low
cost to keep the old tools around for quite awhile ... I would think ...
Dale
