Re: I am standing by Juan's proposal, do you? (was Re: Removing Etoys, Morphic and other friends)

Adrian Lienhard writes:
 > +1
 > 
 > I wonder, what is the opinion of the Squeakland people?
 > 
 > The arguments for keeping etoys in Squeak seem even weaker to me if  
 > the actual stakeholders do not state "yes, this is important for us  
 > because we plan to keep our Squeakland fork in sync with future  
 > Squeak versions". If this is not the case it does not make sense to  
 > have a non maintained version in the main image (and that is what we  
 > have now). If there are people willing to remove etoys we should not  
 > miss the opportunity!

+1

A cleaner smaller Morphic helps for all non-eToy's uses. Unless eToys
is actively maintained in the squeak-dev images then it's better to
remove it and point eToys users to the "good" versions.

Letting it rot will create confusion.

Bryce

re: I am standing by Juan's proposal, do you? (was Re: Removing Etoys, Morphic and other friends)

Göran, all,

Göran's approval endorsement means a lot to me, no offense to anyone else.  EToys strikes me as something
better existing on top of rather than in morphic.  Much of what Juan proposes make sense, and I really like
the idea of having powerful transformations ready to compose and use.

I strongly disagree with the idea of removing pixels; make them basic/prim/whatever, but removing the
most basic element of graphics needlessly bold IMHO (see comment re PDA and other small machines below).

Making morphs zoom/scale is GREAT.  They must also be resizeable.  Both of these shape changes are useful.

Floats are great, but I think that much of the GUI can and should be rendered with integer arithmetic.  Some
scalings could be established in physical vs. logical dimensions, and once that filters into the
remainder of the calculation, floats will appear everywhere; Smalltalk's usual dynamic nature should
take over.  With some work, it could probably be made to be efficient and flexible, with the cost of
flexibility being voluntary.  With that said, I will admit to creating a very complex user interface with
most things specified in floating point inches.  Still, I do not think we should force that on PDAs etc. that
might not have the FLOPS of a 3GHz desktop machine.  Integers have their uses.

Bill

Göran (much snipped):
Since it feels that we are getting more concrete here I decided to
rename the subject. Perhaps people join up in the discussion again. :)

Though I am just one of "us" you know. :) But yes, it is nice to feel
that people agree - and as I said I am all with you for three major
reasons:

1. You are a doer. You have already proved that.

Re: I am standing by Juan's proposal, do you? (was Re: Removing Etoys, Morphic and other friends)

Re: I am standing by Juan's proposal, do you? (was Re: Removing Etoys, Morphic and other friends)

>> I wonder, what is the opinion of the Squeakland people?
>>
>> The arguments for keeping etoys in Squeak seem even weaker to
>> me if the actual stakeholders do not state "yes, this is
>> important for us because we plan to keep our Squeakland fork
>> in sync with future Squeak versions". If this is not the case
>> it does not make sense to have a non maintained version in
>> the main image (and that is what we have now). If there are
>> people willing to remove etoys we should not miss the opportunity!
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Adrian

+1

I also vote for a cleaner version of Morphic. But I think that it will be
less painfull if we take a different route. Instead of having an OldMorph
and doing the experiments on the (new) Morph class,  I propose to leave that
class as it is and do the experiments on a new class (eg. SqMorph). Once we
get a nice and clean model, we can think on how to migrate the old morphs to
the new ones (if necessary).

Juan, I attach a ChangeSet that can be load on a 3.9 image. Unfortunately, 
as the following workspace code shows, it's not fully working at the 
moment... (maybe there is a missing method required by your new model in the 
old Morph hierarchy).

sqWorld := PasteUpMorph new.
sqWorld openInWorld.
sqWorld extent: 300 <at> 300.
sqWorld addMorph: EllipseMorph new.
sqWorld delete.
sqWorld addMorph: SqTestMorph new.
sqWorld halt openInWorld

Saludos,
Francisco

Re: I am standing by Juan's proposal, do you? (was Re: Removing Etoys, Morphic and other friends)

I think this is a pointless discussion until there is real code to  
adopt.

Just my $0.02.

Re: I am standing by Juan's proposal, do you?

Hi Folks,

I apologize for not answering each message, but I can't get mail
(problems @dc.uba.ar). So, if anybody sent me personal mail today, most
likely I lost it. Please resend to this adress.

First of all, Goran, thank you for your support.

I don't think this needs much further discussion. But I'd like to know
the board's opinion (or at least, the board member's one).

To Ron, you asked 'A question for Juan, can your Morphic 3.0
advancements be applied to Tweak?'. I don't know. You also said 'I would
like to see Juan and other Squeak developers work towards getting Tweak
ready and include it in Squeak'. Do you think it is of any use each one
of us to start saying what we would like the others to work on? Come on!
Nobody gets paid here. Each one of us works on whatever we want!

To *Jimmie, wrt '*and I would love to see some pre-built images which
target certain user groups, eToys, business apps, web server, etc. I
believe Spoon, Pavel & Juan, offer hope for such a future'. I agree with
you. Thanks.

To Bill, I agree that floats and general transformations are not the
best solution for everything. Your point about PDAs is specially valid.
Currently Morphic 3.0 is not a reasonable alternative to replace Morphic
2.0. But maybe some day. Wrt to 'killing the pixel'. The pixel is dying
anyway. Postcript, pdf, display postcript, aqua, vista, see where the
path goes?

To Francisco, Interesting experiment!

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

Re: here is a plan!

Hi Jecel,

I apologize for breaking the thread, but I'm having problems with my
mail provider and I can't answer to your mail.

> Ok, so this is a rather different project than what I was hoping for.
> Some of the problems you mention could be attacked by refactoring and
> using Traits but this would imply a lot of changes just to have
> essentially what we have now.

I agree.

> So I would like to ask about the plan proposed by Klaus (replacing
> Morphic 2.0 with an eToyless Morphic 3.0) what is the level of
> compatibility that we would have? Would I be able to grab some old
> project from SqueakMap and have it work or would stuff like Celeste, IRC
> and others have to be updated?

The "plan proposed by Klaus" seems to be what I'm doing, and you can
download from www.jvuletich.org .
I will not guarantee back compatibility. Anyway, I'm not redoing
PluggableMorphs. And if I do it sometime, I guess that could be back
compatible. After all, the old applications (browser, etc) work the same
with PluggableViews in MVC as with PluggableMorphs. That suggests that
compatibility with that programming model could be kept. Of course,
other morphs most likely will not work.

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

Update: Google Crawls Into Source-Code Search

Hi folks,

I've just finished posting .gz, .tar.gz and .zip URLs from the release  
related subdirectories of
- http://ftp.squeak.org/

using this form <phew/>
- http://www.google.com/codesearch/addcode

Ken: is there a way to find out what crawlers access http://ftp.squeak.org/

/Klaus

On Sat, 07 Oct 2006 07:19:04 +0200, Klaus D. Witzel  
<klaus.witzel <at> cobss.com> wrote:

> Have a look at
>
> - http://www.google.com/codesearch?q=lang:smalltalk+continuation
>
> and enjoy Open Source!
>
> /Klaus
>
>
>

Re: I am standing by Juan's proposal, do you?

On 11/1/06, Juan Vuletich <juan <at> jvuletich.org> wrote:
> I don't think this needs much further discussion. But I'd like to know
> the board's opinion (or at least, the board member's one).
>

Ok - very short and very general. I missed most of the discussion -
problems with my back kept me from reading any mailing lists, I could
barely sit behind the computer long enough to read my personal mail.

I'm a "do it" kind of guy. If someone with a good reputation proposes
to clean up some of the mess in the image, I will heartily endorse it.
If people think that particular guy will mess things up, they can join
the team and work with him, or keep their mouths shut :)

So, I'd say: go ahead!

Cleaning and removing Etoys

Juan, fellow Squeakers.

I'm so fool what think could reload Etoys.
But I don't wish do things what don't have consensus.
So I send small ideas for cleaning/ changing actual Morphic 2.0 what could
end in unloading/loading Etoys.

This time I wish move StickySketchMorph in category: 'EToys-Scripting
Support' to a new category 'MorphicExtras-Etoy-Compatible'

And I send to morphic list too, just to see who is in and ready to work

Edgar

__________________________________________________
Correo Yahoo!
Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis! 
¡Abrí tu cuenta ya! - http://correo.yahoo.com.ar