[Box-Admins] Re: [squeak-dev] Re: [Seaside] SqueakSource/Seaside question - has anyone seen this problem before?

[Tobias Pape]

On 14.01.2014, at 14:02, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:

> 
> On 14.01.2014, at 13:50, David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
> 
>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 11:25:14AM +0100, Tobias Pape wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 14.01.2014, at 11:21, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hm, I thought Tobias meant "run source.squeak.org's image with SS3
>>>> code" rather than "move source.squeak.org's code to the SS3 servers".
>>>> 
>>>> Which would address your concerns about external/internal projects,
>>>> and the need to self-host.
>>> 
>>> Yes.
>>> 
>> 
>> That was my understanding of the conversation as well.
> 
> So you argue that patching ssc (squeaksource.com) to support newer 
> Squeak and Seaside *again* is easier or more sustainable than
> migrating to the sqeaksource3 codebase?


OH forget that mail!
I confused Chris and Dave. I am so stupid today :(
Sorry

Best
	-Tobiad
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 1665 bytes
Desc: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/box-admins/attachments/20140114/9de499c9/signature.pgp