I was thinking the same thing. Enterprises need to rely on a stable distribution over a long period of time. That's why many Linux distros have LTS versions.
That's why VisualWorks is the enterprise standard. tblanchard wrote > OK, I have to push back at this. > > When Pharo forked I was excited because Squeak was such a fast moving lab > experiment that you couldn't build anything and expect it to work in a > year. > > Pharo was supposed to be the "business ready" fork leaving Squeak to be > the crazy lab experiment. > > From https://pharo.org/about > > It says: > > Pharo's goal is to deliver a clean, innovative, free and open-source > immersive environment. > > By providing a stable and small core system, excellent developing tools, > and maintained releases, Pharo is an attractive platform to build and > deploy mission critical applications. > > But you are telling me that Pharo is also a fast moving lab experiment > that is too unstable for real work? > > I understand this is hard but is there a definitive roadmap and plan to > reach to stability? > >> On May 6, 2018, at 4:00 AM, Norbert Hartl < > norbert@ > > wrote: >> >> Can you elaborate on what you consider as a kernel? There are always >> things moving in the pharo world. The last years the virtual machine got >> some iterations and it is still not fully stable. For pharo it is hard to >> have it stable because we feel the need that a lot of the existing parts >> need to be replaced to be useful in these times. Furthermore pharo is >> also prototyping platform for programming language features. All of these >> are counter-stability measures. So if you need a stable kernel from >> native ground up to UI pharo won‘t be that thing you are looking for the >> coming years (if at all). You always need to adopt to change so you need >> to define your required scope better in order to get an estimate. >> >> Norbert >> >> Am 06.05.2018 um 11:31 schrieb Trygve Reenskaug < > trygver@.uio > <mailto: > trygver@.uio > >>: >> >>> I'm working on a programing paradigm and IDE for the personal programmer >>> who wants to control his or her IoT. The size of the target audience I >>> have in mind is >100 million. I gave up Squeak long ago as a platform >>> because they obsolete my code faster than I can write it. I have now >>> frozen Squeak 3.10.2 and hope its runtime will survive until I find a >>> better foundation. My hope is that Pharo has a stable kernel that I can >>> build on. According to Stephan, this is not so. Is there any plan for >>> creating a stable Pharo kernel that people can use for building software >>> of lasting value for millions of non-expert users? >>> --Thanks, Trygve >>> >>> On 05.05.2018 13:53, Stephan Eggermont wrote: >>>> I’ve taken a look at what would be needed to >>>> support magma on pharo a few years ago. Chris always told us he uses it >>>> professionally on squeak and has not enough capacity to keep up with >>>> changes in pharo without having a customer/maintainer for it. Twice a >>>> year >>>> or so someone asks about magma on pharo and takes a look. AFAIK there >>>> are >>>> no real obstacles to a port, but magma uses a lot of deep >>>> implementation >>>> specifics that will take an experienced smalltalker to deal with, and a >>>> lot >>>> of mailing list archeology as pharo changed a lot since magma worked on >>>> pharo last >>>> >>>> Stephan >>> >>> -- >>> The essence of object orientation is that objects collaborate to >>> achieve a goal. >>> Trygve Reenskaug mailto: > trygver@.uio > <mailto:% > 20trygver@.uio > > >>> Morgedalsvn. 5A http://folk.uio.no/trygver/ >>> <http://folk.uio.no/trygver/> >>> N-0378 Oslo http://fullOO.info <http://fulloo.info/> >>> Norway Tel: (+47) 22 49 57 27 -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Users-f1310670.html
