Andreas Raab a écrit :
You're totally missing my point. Let's take one example from your list: ToolBuilder. Let's say you've got some work that uses it, would you really expect that in each new Squeak version you have to spend major effort to port your code to the latest ToolBuilder version? Or wouldn't you rather expect that there is a stable API that can be used and that may be extended over time, or even broken, but if it's broken that you may get some notice about it beforehand? Or, in particular when the changes get really fundamental, that instead of modifying ToolBuilder in-place you get the offer to use either ToolBuilder (working the way it always did) and whatever the brand-new framework of the day is?
I'm curious but is my position in this discussion really so outrageous?
No, you get a very good point. API change is the nightmare of software developer. You just fell frustrated to spend time to re-write already done things. I remember experiencing such frustration with pre-2.0 Gnome libraries. We may want to have cycle of stable API version of Squeak, inlcuded in the road-map.
Hilaire