On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 2:55 AM, Викентий Потапов <vikenti.pota...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks Stef, also thank all of you for your support. It is very important to > me and shows that Pharo is really in progress. > I didn't ever complained - i just asked simple questions on topics i don't > know. And i get lot's of answers to make some decisions. I understand where > to get information and what are the prospects of using Pharo. > > I came to Pharo looking for appropreate Smalltalk implementation after Cincom > denied access to its PUL version of VW. I found Pharo as the most advanced > but it also has its disadvantages. > > My project is a desktop GUI application with some hacks with saving data > to\from image on-the-fly and lots of GUI dialogs + complex custom GUI > control. It is a kind of personal data\information manager.
Did you look at the Spec book? > > I'm very lazy and i like to read rich manuals more than to investigate > complex code. Me too. But nobody gets paid to write documentation not even me. I think it is much more natural when you don't need to study the whole system before you can do simple things. For example, i don't want to waste lots of time to understand what is the difference between bloc and spec, i want to read few paragraphs of manual and look into some class comments, and than do the task. > Bloc is not for you. So i think you made a great progress in this direction with Spec - the manual is very clear and allows developing UI with minimal efforts - just to read some abstracts from manual. > You see we wrote this manual for FREE. I will also update it for FREE. > > But in some areas i need to ask somebody who knows much more than i do. And i > don't think there could be "dumb questions", but a _lack_of_information_. > Also, when something is evident to one - it could be not so evident to > another person. That is why i ask such simple things. > There is no problem. Just think that Pharo is open source and that it is our COMMON GOODS. We all share it and we ALL try to make it better. > Also i became accustomed to the situation when platform implements some basic > stuff like i wrote earlier (UI tools, i18n, deployment, etc) and it was not > evident to me that such modern system as Pharo cannot do it, so i asked about > it. Sure now you can improve Pharo too. > I have seen that Pharo is powerful system but i need to decide what to do: > 1) create some personal solution based on different answers above. Lots of > code investigations, coding and debugging (fixing existed bugs that are not > on pharo roadmap). If you have many forms you may have a look at magritte the Morph builder does not work anymore but may be it is worth fixing it. > 2) wait until some release of Pharo fix bugs with non-latin paths, implement > minimal level of integrated with UI framework i18n and deployment\packaging > of applications. It does not work like that. If you do not open a bug entry with a clear problem description why people not having this problem should fix it? We are making sure that Pharo can be used for people to deliver product and make money but we have also our agenda and duties. Now the best things that you can do is help yourself and we will help you but do not expect that magically we fix the problems you have. Look for example Alistair spotted some problems in FileSystem and he fixed them and we integrated them for the benefits of EVERYBODY. > > Every software developer tries to find the simplest solution for his task. Yes but this is not the point. Pharo can shape your future and Pharo is not a close product. Now we can all contribute. Just start to open a bug entry with a test. This is the first step if you want that we spend time on your problem. > > I apologized if i said something wrong, i really didn't want to hurt > somebody's feelings. No do not worry. I have a strong skin :) Stef > > Vikenti. > >> >> We are focused on deployment but not the same way. >> We are the first system that bootstrap a core and can load >> dependencies on this core. >> We have a dependency analyser that is really advanced since it can >> check that you have message that are not in extension >> of packages that you use. >> In January I hope that we will start packaging Applications (versus >> packaging code), so that people can deploy >> desktop applications more easily. >> >> Now if people like vikenti wants our support. They should learn how to >> engage a discussion with us and not >> just complain :) >> >> Stef >> >
