Hi Juan,
on Thu, 26 Oct 2006 15:01:12 +0200, you wrote:
Hi Klaus,
Concentrating on the remaining issue(s): why is it so important that Morphic must be independent of Etoys, are they (have they) subclasses etc of each other? Or are there political reasons for having such an independence, or license reasons? Or what (perhaps elegance, perhaps maintainability)?
Elegance and maintainability. Also to make it easier to use Morphic for other purposes (for example, writing applications), that won't use eToys.
Great!
If there isn't anybody suggesting that she/he will divide Morphic by Etoys, starting with 3.9 and targeting for example 3.10 or 4.0, then please treat these questions as 100%[tm] rhetoric, thank you.
/Klaus
Well, In this very thread I said I have already done it in 3.7 (meaning I showed that it can be done, that I can do it, and that you can check the quality of my work). I also said I volunteer for doing it once more, in the latest image, if the community wants to adopt it.
Yes, I'm happy to hearing this, and I thank you!
I also add here that I would remove only what the community wants removed. I mean, Goran said recently he would like to keep Flaps in. Ok. If we can decide what to remove and what to keep, I'll be happy to follow that decision.
Why would he want that? What's his use case for it? Personally I would wait for the outcome of
- http://www.google.com/search?q=designer+sex+kilobuck+site:lists.squeakfounda...
Note that I'm not volunteering to make eToys loadable back in. I already said why.
So, you see, the question is not rethoric at all.
:)
/Klaus
Cheers, Juan Vuletich