MetacelloBrowser ui...

11 views
Skip to first unread message

Dale Henrichs

unread,
Apr 25, 2011, 11:29:09 AM4/25/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com
I am very close to deciding to do a web-based ui for MetacelloBrowser...

It is very important that the MetacelloBrowser have common functionality
across all three Monticello platforms: GemStone, Pharo, and Squeak. But
the only common UI framework is OmniBrowser and I am afraid that
OmniBrowser isn't flexible enough to build a wizard-like ui for
interactively constructing a configuration ...

I think it would be pretty trivial (for me anyway) to build such and
interface on the web ... I would need help with CSS magic for a nice
layout, but I.m pretty sure that I could get the basic functionality
laid out across multiple pages pretty easily ...

AFAIK it is just no technically feasible to build a wizard-style
interface in OmniBrowser, so there don't appear to be any other cross
platform solutions...

I writing this, because I am hoping that one of you will be able to
_prove_ me wrong:)

If not, I will be force to begin work on a browser-based
MetacelloBrowser ...

Dale

Miguel Cobá

unread,
Apr 25, 2011, 11:50:57 AM4/25/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com
How will a web browser interact with version of package in my image when
I am updating a configuration to include the fresh changes I made to mcz
files.
Will save "on the cloud" somewhere?

I don't get the full picture here.

Cheers

--
Miguel Cobá
http://twitter.com/MiguelCobaMtz
http://miguel.leugim.com.mx

Dale Henrichs

unread,
Apr 25, 2011, 12:06:40 PM4/25/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com, Miguel Cobá
On 04/25/2011 08:50 AM, Miguel Cobá wrote:
> How will a web browser interact with version of package in my image when
> I am updating a configuration to include the fresh changes I made to mcz
> files.
> Will save "on the cloud" somewhere?
>
> I don't get the full picture here.

It could be made to work, I wish it could be made to work for
OmniBrowser:( or another GUI framework, but my GUI framework foo is
pretty minimal...

The web browser could interact with a web-server in the image-itself ...
so it would be operating on the contents of the image ... not pretty,
but I don't have many other alternatives:( I'm considering using Iliad,
because it is smaller than OmniBrowser.

The current MBInfo model is structured such that all of the work is done
in the model itself ... I would take a similar approach to the wizard
... 99.9% of the business logic would be implemented in a model object
that is GUI framework neutral ...

I just need a GUI framework where I won't spend more time futzing with
the framework (because I am not an experted) than doing the actual work ...

Mariano Martinez Peck

unread,
Apr 25, 2011, 12:12:16 PM4/25/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com
Hi Dale. I guess you are already aware of...but ... SUPPOSE that Glamour is enough for your needs. Glamour can result in plain Morphic but also in seaside. So would be able to have both flavors: image based in Glamour for those who want everything image based, and a web alternative (for example for Gemstone).
But...I have no idea how stable/complete the GlamourWeb is, nor if it contains what you need.

And finally, did you consider SeasideXUL ?  But I guess it may happens what you don't want: spend more time in the  framework than in your job :(

Cheers

Mariano
--
Mariano
http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

Dale Henrichs

unread,
Apr 25, 2011, 12:37:03 PM4/25/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com, Mariano Martinez Peck
On 04/25/2011 09:12 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
> Hi Dale. I guess you are already aware of...but ... SUPPOSE that Glamour
> is enough for your needs. Glamour can result in plain Morphic but also
> in seaside. So would be able to have both flavors: image based in
> Glamour for those who want everything image based, and a web alternative
> (for example for Gemstone).
> But...I have no idea how stable/complete the GlamourWeb is, nor if it
> contains what you need.
>
> And finally, did you consider SeasideXUL ? But I guess it may happens
> what you don't want: spend more time in the framework than in your job :(

I don't have Glamour ported to GemStone (has it been ported to Squeak?)
and I don't know if I gain in the end ... Can one build a wizard in
Glamour ? ... I've spent a lot of time trying to bend OmniBrowser to my
will, but there are some things that are just not easy to do in
OmniBrowser ... I don't know myself if Glamour can do what i have in
mind or how much bending to my will it will take:)

If someone built a wizard in Glamour for creating a complex
configuration (like Seaside or Moose) then it might be enough to
motivate my to attempt the port:)

But if is up to me, I am going to go with something I already know (I
just don't have enough time to do what I know, let alone what I don't know)

I already pretty much know what I would have to do to do a wizard for a
web browser ...

I appreciate the suggestions to use framework x, y, or z to solve the
problem, but I am not an expert in any of the frameworks, and if a
framework isn't ported to GemStone is it worth porting the framework to
GemStone only to find that it doesn't fill the bill? Conversely if I
build the wizard in technology z and then find out that it is very
difficult to port to GemStone, where am I?

Using a web framework I am very confident that I could get a model/ui
built that does the job and is portable to all three platforms ... I
can't say that (with confidence) for any other approach...

Dale

Mariano Martinez Peck

unread,
Apr 25, 2011, 12:46:36 PM4/25/11
to Dale Henrichs, meta...@googlegroups.com, Moose-dev Moose Dev
On Mon, Apr 25, 2011 at 6:37 PM, Dale Henrichs <dhen...@vmware.com> wrote:
On 04/25/2011 09:12 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
Hi Dale. I guess you are already aware of...but ... SUPPOSE that Glamour
is enough for your needs. Glamour can result in plain Morphic but also
in seaside. So would be able to have both flavors: image based in
Glamour for those who want everything image based, and a web alternative
(for example for Gemstone).
But...I have no idea how stable/complete the GlamourWeb is, nor if it
contains what you need.

And finally, did you consider SeasideXUL ?  But I guess it may happens
what you don't want: spend more time in the  framework than in your job :(

I don't have Glamour ported to GemStone (has it been ported to Squeak?) and I don't know if I gain in the end ... Can one build a wizard in Glamour ? ... I've spent a lot of time trying to bend OmniBrowser to my will, but there are some things that are just not easy to do in OmniBrowser ... I don't know myself if Glamour can do what i have in mind or how much bending to my will it will take:)


I don't know that neither.
 
If someone built a wizard in Glamour for creating a complex configuration (like Seaside or Moose) then it might be enough to motivate my to attempt the port:)

But if is up to me, I am going to go with something I already know (I just don't have enough time to do what I know, let alone what I don't know)

I already pretty much know what I would have to do to do a wizard for a web browser ...

I appreciate the suggestions to use framework x, y, or z to solve the problem, but I am not an expert in any of the frameworks, and if a framework isn't ported to GemStone is it worth porting the framework to GemStone only to find that it doesn't fill the bill? Conversely if I build the wizard in technology z and then find out that it is very difficult to port to GemStone, where am I?


If fact, what I was thinking is that from Glamour you can generate the Seaside output, so for Gemstone you don't need to port anything, just use the seaside components generated from Glamour (be careful, this is how I think Glamour-seaside works but maybe I am wrong and you need glamour anyway)
 
Using a web framework I am very confident that I could get a model/ui built that does the job and is portable to all three platforms ... I can't say that (with confidence) for any other approach...


Sure. But it is realy really bad to see we don't have a single way of creating portable browsers/wizzard or whatever they are called between 3 dialects.


--
Mariano
http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

Tudor Girba

unread,
Apr 26, 2011, 5:01:44 PM4/26/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com, Dale Henrichs, Moose-dev Moose Dev
Hi,

Glamour should be able to accommodate your requests. Just a note, Glamour is not a user interface framework, it is a browser framework, and it's goal is to help you browse and manipulate data.

I have a bit of time this week and I could work on this. I propose to start from a list of use cases. When I say use cases I do not mean user interface use cases. I would be interested in the activities that you would like to accomplish.

Cheers,
Doru

--
www.tudorgirba.com

"No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef."


Dale Henrichs

unread,
Apr 26, 2011, 5:27:58 PM4/26/11
to Tudor Girba, meta...@googlegroups.com, Moose-dev Moose Dev
On 04/26/2011 02:01 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Glamour should be able to accommodate your requests. Just a note, Glamour is not a user interface framework, it is a browser framework, and it's goal is to help you browse and manipulate data.
>
> I have a bit of time this week and I could work on this. I propose to start from a list of use cases. When I say use cases I do not mean user interface use cases. I would be interested in the activities that you would like to accomplish.
>
> Cheers,
> Doru
>

What resources does Glamour require? ... For GemStone, OmniBrowser is
the only framework supported ... there is no native Morphic, so because
OmniBrowser was architected with a small intefact between Morphic and
the Browser model, I was able to "make it work" with GemStone as the
server and Pharo as the client ...

Sooo that is the main limiting factor in "porting" Glamour to GemStone ...

The use case of the moment is providing support for constructing complex
configurations, including conditional packages ... the works ... I have
a concept of how I'd like to accomplish this, but it has not fully
emerged as something that I can completely articulate ... I haven't
drawn any pictures either, so the only picture is in my brain:)

The short term goal would be to improve the simple interface reachable
by the +Configuration button ... There we have several steps that are
performed in a series of dialog boxes, so just putting the individual
operations into a single window with forms fill out for textual items
and drag/drop from a list of packages for the initial specification ...

This would give us a starting point to work towards the complexity of
specifying something like Moose or Seaside ... where required/included
packages are specified and specs are moved around between conditional
sections ... Projects are dropped onto the version window from a list of
projects and then the basic template (name, configuration name and
repository) can be editted expanded ...

Dale

stephane ducasse

unread,
Apr 26, 2011, 5:45:19 PM4/26/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com, Nick Papoylias, Tudor Girba, Moose-dev Moose Dev
dale

nick should be working on remote tools for his phd and may be gemstone could be a validation too.

Stef

Dale Henrichs

unread,
Apr 26, 2011, 5:56:03 PM4/26/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com, stephane ducasse, Nick Papoylias, Tudor Girba, Moose-dev Moose Dev
Nick, Doru,

I am obviously interested in this ... The current OmniBrowser-based
"remote tools suite" for GemStone is adequate, but not ideal ... the cut
point for the interface between GemStone and Pharo (the client GUI) is
at the update:/changed: layer which can be VERY CHATTY across the wire ...

I am intrigued by the idea of javascript-browser-based tools, but
development tools in the browser will have to be "different" than the
traditional image-based tools, just because the browser itself is
different ...

I would like to understand where the basic cut point for Glamour is and
find out if there is a natural point to "insert the wire" between the
Morphic-window and the server ...

Since GemStone has no native gui, all tools must be remote:)

Dale

Tudor Girba

unread,
Apr 26, 2011, 8:01:08 PM4/26/11
to Dale Henrichs, meta...@googlegroups.com, stephane ducasse, Nick Papoylias, Moose-dev Moose Dev
Hi Dale,

Glamour is independent from the rendering, just like Omnibrowser is. Here is a short description:
http://www.themoosebook.org/book/internals/glamour/rendering

We already have a working Seaside rendering code for the basic widgets of Glamour. For an example, take the following steps:

1. download
http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-with-glamour-seaside/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/moose-seaside/*zip*/moose-seaside.zip

2. run:
WAKom startOn: 8081

3. go to:
http://localhost:8081/moose/metaBrowser

Cheers,
Doru

--
www.tudorgirba.com

"Every thing has its own flow."


Dale Henrichs

unread,
Apr 26, 2011, 8:22:02 PM4/26/11
to Tudor Girba, meta...@googlegroups.com, stephane ducasse, Nick Papoylias, Moose-dev Moose Dev
On 04/26/2011 05:01 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
> Hi Dale,
>
> Glamour is independent from the rendering, just like Omnibrowser is. Here is a short description:
> http://www.themoosebook.org/book/internals/glamour/rendering
>
> We already have a working Seaside rendering code for the basic widgets of Glamour. For an example, take the following steps:
>
> 1. download
> http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-with-glamour-seaside/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/moose-seaside/*zip*/moose-seaside.zip
>
> 2. run:
> WAKom startOn: 8081
>
> 3. go to:
> http://localhost:8081/moose/metaBrowser
>
> Cheers,
> Doru

I'll hold off exploring the scope of the Glamour port until I see if
Glamour can be used to construct the configuration wizard:)

I'm not skeptical as much as I am very busy...

Did I provide you with enough info for the use case?

Dale

Tudor Girba

unread,
Apr 26, 2011, 8:27:57 PM4/26/11
to Dale Henrichs, meta...@googlegroups.com, stephane ducasse, Nick Papoylias, Moose-dev Moose Dev
Hi Dale,

Not really :).

Cheers,
Doru


--
www.tudorgirba.com

"Beauty is where we see it."

Dale Henrichs

unread,
Apr 26, 2011, 9:23:05 PM4/26/11
to Tudor Girba, meta...@googlegroups.com, stephane ducasse, Nick Papoylias, Moose-dev Moose Dev

On Apr 26, 2011, at 5:27 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:

> Hi Dale,
>
> On 27 Apr 2011, at 02:22, Dale Henrichs wrote:
>
>> On 04/26/2011 05:01 PM, Tudor Girba wrote:
>>> Hi Dale,
>>>
>>> Glamour is independent from the rendering, just like Omnibrowser is. Here is a short description:
>>> http://www.themoosebook.org/book/internals/glamour/rendering
>>>
>>> We already have a working Seaside rendering code for the basic widgets of Glamour. For an example, take the following steps:
>>>
>>> 1. download
>>> http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-with-glamour-seaside/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/moose-seaside/*zip*/moose-seaside.zip
>>>
>>> 2. run:
>>> WAKom startOn: 8081
>>>
>>> 3. go to:
>>> http://localhost:8081/moose/metaBrowser
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Doru
>>
>> I'll hold off exploring the scope of the Glamour port until I see if Glamour can be used to construct the configuration wizard:)
>>
>> I'm not skeptical as much as I am very busy...
>>
>> Did I provide you with enough info for the use case?
>
> Not really :).

okay?

Tobias Pape

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 1:30:03 AM4/27/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com

Am 2011-04-27 um 02:01 schrieb Tudor Girba:

> Hi Dale,
>
> Glamour is independent from the rendering, just like Omnibrowser is. Here is a short description:
> http://www.themoosebook.org/book/internals/glamour/rendering
>
> We already have a working Seaside rendering code for the basic widgets of Glamour. For an example, take the following steps:
>
> 1. download
> http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/job/moose-with-glamour-seaside/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/moose-seaside/*zip*/moose-seaside.zip
>
> 2. run:
> WAKom startOn: 8081
>
> 3. go to:
> http://localhost:8081/moose/metaBrowser
>
> Cheers,
> Doru

Is it usable in Squeak4.2?

So Long,
-Tobias

Tudor Girba

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 3:33:10 AM4/27/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com
Hi,

I never tried but you are welcome to. If you do, please let us know what happened :)

Cheers,
Doru

> So Long,
> -Tobias
>

--
www.tudorgirba.com

"There are no old things, there are only old ways of looking at them."

Tobias Pape

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 4:17:28 AM4/27/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com

Am 2011-04-27 um 09:33 schrieb Tudor Girba:

>> […]


>> Is it usable in Squeak4.2?
>
> I never tried but you are welcome to. If you do, please let us know what happened :)
>
> Cheers,
> Doru
>

Can you give me some starting points?

So Long,
-Tobias

Tudor Girba

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 4:28:06 AM4/27/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com, Moose-dev Moose Dev
Hi,

This is the default way to load the latest version:

Gofer new
squeaksource: 'Glamour';
package: 'ConfigurationOfGlamourSeaside';
load.
(Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfGlamourSeaside) loadDefault.

Cheers,
Doru

--
www.tudorgirba.com

"It's not how it is, it is how we see it."

Tudor Girba

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 4:38:22 AM4/27/11
to Dale Henrichs, meta...@googlegroups.com, stephane ducasse, Nick Papoylias, Moose-dev Moose Dev
Hi,


I re-read the original mail, and indeed there is enough information :). I will try to give it a try. What I saw is that there is basically no dependency between steps. Is that correct? If yes, then all steps would fit in a simple Magritte form.

Cheers,
Doru

Dale Henrichs

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 4:52:50 AM4/27/11
to Nick Papoylias, Tudor Girba, meta...@googlegroups.com, stephane ducasse, Moose-dev Moose Dev
Hello Nick,

So then the cut-point is at the level of message sends between the GUI and the model?

How are events handled (messages from the model to the GUI) ... this is the spot where I think that OmniBrowser (in the GLASS implementation) started to falter ... there a large number of event messages that end up with more network round trips than one would like ...

It seems that there is a need for some sort of "message concentrator" that cuts down on network round trips, but this is wandering into "early optimization" territory:)

I think it would definitely be interesting to give this a try with GemStone as it has the potential to provide much more flexibility in terms of which GUI components can be used ....

Dale
On Apr 27, 2011, at 1:27 AM, Nick Papoylias wrote:

Hallo Dale,

In terms of remote tools, we are working with rST which is still kind of unstable but still
useful in many cases. Hopefully in your case too.

http://www.squeaksource.com/@69jY6Xu1NHtRD19j/lOHxDstw

So if your scenario is this:

You already have or you are creating a tool with Model-View architecture
that plays well when tested locally on a client and you want to go remote.


Then with rST (hopefully) you just wrap your model in a network proxy and everything plays out of the box remotely.

At least this is our goal.. we are currently working with remote reflection (in a more theoretical sense) but
we should and will find time to make rST more robust for the community.

I hope this helped, a bit.

Nick

Dale Henrichs

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 5:04:39 AM4/27/11
to Tudor Girba, meta...@googlegroups.com, stephane ducasse, Nick Papoylias, Moose-dev Moose Dev

The challenging aspects of the wizard involve allowing a user to select from a list of repositories (for the repository information), from a (filtered) list of packages and a list of projects when building the basic specs to be included in a baseline.

At the next level of complexity, one must be allowed to define dependencies (required:) between packages and put the specs in different for:do: blocks ... Within the Metacello, there is an API and a model for managing these, but I a m sure that the API/model can be improved when we get to this point.

So I suppose that the initial wizard could be done in Magritte...

Dale

Tobias Pape

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 5:41:57 AM4/27/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com
Hi,

Am 2011-04-27 um 10:28 schrieb Tudor Girba:

> Hi,
>
> This is the default way to load the latest version:
>
> Gofer new
> squeaksource: 'Glamour';
> package: 'ConfigurationOfGlamourSeaside';
> load.
> (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfGlamourSeaside) loadDefault.
>
> Cheers,
> Doru

This does not work even for the Metacello Part, as you are using
a customized #ensureMetacello that will not work on a vanilla
Squeak, there is no Gofer available.
Shall I update your configs so that they at least can try to work?

So Long
-Tobias

Tudor Girba

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 6:03:31 AM4/27/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com
Hi Tobias,

Please just load Metacello first manually and then try GlamourSeaside.

Cheers,
Doru

> So Long
> -Tobias

Tobias Pape

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 6:29:13 AM4/27/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com

Am 2011-04-27 um 12:03 schrieb Tudor Girba:

> Hi Tobias,
>
> On 27 Apr 2011, at 11:41, Tobias Pape wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Am 2011-04-27 um 10:28 schrieb Tudor Girba:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> This is the default way to load the latest version:
>>>
>>> Gofer new
>>> squeaksource: 'Glamour';
>>> package: 'ConfigurationOfGlamourSeaside';
>>> load.
>>> (Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfGlamourSeaside) loadDefault.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Doru
>>
>> This does not work even for the Metacello Part, as you are using
>> a customized #ensureMetacello that will not work on a vanilla
>> Squeak, there is no Gofer available.
>> Shall I update your configs so that they at least can try to work?
>
> Please just load Metacello first manually and then try GlamourSeaside.

Is there a reason that you don't us a standard ensureMetacello?

so long
-tobias

Tudor Girba

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 6:41:15 AM4/27/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com
Hi,

No reason other than that the "standard" is evolving and due to the current copy paste solution, the configurations are bound to remain behind. On top of that, I do not know what the current standard actually is.

Cheers,
Doru


> so long
> -tobias
>

--
www.tudorgirba.com

"Problem solving efficiency grows with the abstractness level of problem understanding."

Dale Henrichs

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 6:57:42 AM4/27/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com
The current recommended #ensureMetacello method is documented here:

http://code.google.com/p/metacello/wiki/EnsureMetacello

The method bootstraps Gofer and will work correctly if either SqueakSource or GemSource is down. After Gofer is bootstrapped the ConfigurationOfMetacello is loaded using Gofer ... the changes were made around 1.0beta.27 and were aimed at making the #ensureMetacello implementation less volatile...

Dale

Tudor Girba

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 7:24:50 AM4/27/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com
Thanks, Dale. I updated ConfigurationOfGlamourSeaside and I will slowly update the other Moose-related configurations.

Cheers,
Doru

--
www.tudorgirba.com

"Obvious things are difficult to teach."

Miguel Cobá

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 11:03:51 AM4/27/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com
Should all the metacello configurations be updated to this version?

Cheers

--
Miguel Cobá
http://twitter.com/MiguelCobaMtz
http://miguel.leugim.com.mx

Dale Henrichs

unread,
Apr 27, 2011, 11:16:09 AM4/27/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com, Miguel Cobá
It wouldn't hurt...I poked around a bit last night and noted that most
of the configs bootstrap gofer and then load the config. The newer
config will at least bootstrap Gofer even if SqueakSource is down ...

Dale

Tobias Pape

unread,
May 31, 2011, 4:26:56 PM5/31/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com
Dale


Am 2011-04-27 um 17:16 schrieb Dale Henrichs:

> It wouldn't hurt...I poked around a bit last night and noted that most of the configs bootstrap gofer and then load the config. The newer config will at least bootstrap Gofer even if SqueakSource is down ...
>
> Dale
>
> On 04/27/2011 08:03 AM, Miguel Cobá wrote:
>> Should all the metacello configurations be updated to this version?
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> El mié, 27-04-2011 a las 03:57 -0700, Dale Henrichs escribió:
>>> The current recommended #ensureMetacello method is documented here:
>>>
>>> http://code.google.com/p/metacello/wiki/EnsureMetacello
>>>
>>> The method bootstraps Gofer and will work correctly if either SqueakSource or GemSource is down. After Gofer is bootstrapped the ConfigurationOfMetacello is loaded using Gofer ... the changes were made around 1.0beta.27 and were aimed at making the #ensureMetacello implementation less volatile...

Can you please put the bootstrapPackage:from:-method there, to?
It is used when Gofer is not found.

Best
-Tobias


Tobias Pape

unread,
May 31, 2011, 4:33:56 PM5/31/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com
Hi,

>>
>> Is it usable in Squeak4.2?
>
> I never tried but you are welcome to. If you do, please let us know what happened :)

Sorry for replying so late.

When I got the Configuration to exectute, somewhere in the middle I get the following:

This package depends on the following classes:
MorphTreeColumn
TabGroupMorph
MorphTreeModel
SubscriptionRegistry
DialogWindow
MorphTreeNodeModel
ThemeIcons
Announcer
Announcement
TabPanelBorder
StandardWindow
MultistateButtonMorph
UIThemeWatery2
You must resolve these dependencies before you will be able to load these definitions:
GLMAccumulator

:/ It seems a lot of tweeking is necessary to overcome
the Squeak/Pharo divergences here.
Doru, can you send me some screenshots of Glamour/GlamourSeaside
so that I can get an impression?

Best
-Tobias

Dale Henrichs

unread,
Jun 6, 2011, 4:39:32 PM6/6/11
to meta...@googlegroups.com
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages