2007/8/15, Göran Krampe goran@krampe.se:

...

I've heard many times that squeak-dev is yet another fork of Squeak. It's NOT the case from my point of view because:

• squeak-dev is built on top of the last squeak release and beta versions
• there is not a single patch applied in squeak-dev
• it's only an aggregation of already existing packages that anyone

can load in his base image

I actually meant squeak.org when I wrote Squeak-dev. I was referring to the image maintained by the developers typically hanging on the squeak-dev mailinglist - and not your image which is called Squeak-Dev. Sorry for the bad choice of words. :)

So I haven't viewed your image as a fork, at least not yet. ;)

Ok :-). But I heard it already that's why I wrote this mail. I hope things are clearer now.

2007/8/15, Igor Stasenko siguctua@gmail.com:

Since its not a fork, and obviously not a spoon, and not mainstream, then what short term can be used to identify it?

A distribution is perfect to me. Is really like a Linux distribution.

Joking.. :)

On 15/08/07, Damien Cassou damien.cassou@gmail.com wrote:

...

2007/8/15, Göran Krampe goran@krampe.se:

...

...

I've heard many times that squeak-dev is yet another fork of Squeak. It's NOT the case from my point of view because:

• squeak-dev is built on top of the last squeak release and beta versions
• there is not a single patch applied in squeak-dev
• it's only an aggregation of already existing packages that anyone

can load in his base image

I actually meant squeak.org when I wrote Squeak-dev. I was referring to the image maintained by the developers typically hanging on the squeak-dev mailinglist - and not your image which is called Squeak-Dev. Sorry for the bad choice of words. :)

So I haven't viewed your image as a fork, at least not yet. ;)

Ok :-). But I heard it already that's why I wrote this mail. I hope things are clearer now.

-- Damien Cassou

-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

19 Aug 2007 12:16:57 -0400, Lex Spoon lex@lexspoon.org:

"Damien Cassou" damien.cassou@gmail.com writes:

...

I've heard many times that squeak-dev is yet another fork of Squeak. It's NOT the case from my point of view because:

• squeak-dev is built on top of the last squeak release and beta versions
• there is not a single patch applied in squeak-dev
• it's only an aggregation of already existing packages that anyone

can load in his base image

I did not realize you felt this way, but it is nice to hear. How do you square this view, though, with your recent inclusion of the Monticello 1.5 patches? These patches change the core image so much that their author says the word "patch" is not an adequate word to describe them.

I don't think including Monticello1.5 in future squeak-dev releases can be seen as a patch to Squeak. This is because, for me, Monticello is just a package. If an enhanced version, maintained by someone interested, is available, I would like people to start using it to discover bugs. However, Monticello1.5 currently has a bug which prevents me from releasing a new squeak-dev based on it.