Re: Flow integration
Colin Putney <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.smalltalk.squeak.foundation |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Thursday, November 21, 2002, at 11:01 PM, Craig Latta wrote: > > Hi Colin-- > >> This process would be appropriate for a monolithic image, but it >> doesn't fly very well in a modular universe. > > Normally I'd agree, but since virtually all the applications we're > talking about recently *were* in a monolithic image (we're still busy > taking them all out :), I think it's much less work right now to > proceed > the "monolithic" way. These are the networking packages that I've used for my day-to-day work: Comanche Mysql drivers RPC-XML rST VNCServer None of these have ever been in the image. I'm sure there are quite a few others out there as well. > For other applications which were never part of > the release image, we can adapt just by making sure they're loaded, > installing Flow, and fixing what breaks. I effectively did that for > everything in 3.2final, and it was easy. Sure, but once I've done that, then what? Then I've got to maintain two code bases. I won't be able to convert all these packages to use flow in an afternoon. Most of them were written by somebody else, (as was flow) so debugging them will take time as I figure out what is supposed to happen as well as what actually is happening. The other way would be to convert all these packages to use OldSocket and friends and make sure I have always have flow installed in all my images. Then I can port the packages one at a time, and still be able to use the as-yet-unconverted packages at the same time. But if there are any show-stoppers, I'm going to have a fair amount of work to move back to the old socket code. And in the meantime I'm dependent on flow, which complicates my image building process, even though I'm not using it yet. Don't get me wrong, I'm a big fan of ontological purity. But come on, you're asking me to do a lot of work and take a big risk to preserve the esthetics of your class names. How about a compromise? Just stick FL at the beginning of each flow class to create a poor man's name space. Then flow can happily along side the old network classes and we can use the packaging system to sort out these problems. Cheers, Colin