[etoys-dev] together again

[Andreas Raab]

Göran Krampe wrote:
> Well, still, it is a crucial point. Let me outline two different 
> scenarios of which I would only support one:

I think this discussion is premature. No plan exists, and these are not 
plausible scenarios since they describe two extremes. The reality will 
be somewhere in the middle.

Cheers,
   - Andres

> Scenario 1:
> 
> - eToys and Squeak-dev merge by simply moving all changes made in the 
> eToys-fork to the eToys code inside Squeak.
> 
> - Work continues on improving eToys inside Squeak based on the needs of 
> the eToys project. The code is still intertangled with the rest of 
> Squeak. There is no clear boundary and we will see eToys specific code 
> in the "core classes" (especially Morphic I presume).
> 
> Scenario 2:
> 
> - eToys and Squeak-dev merge by moving all changes made in the 
> eToys-fork to the eToys code inside Squeak BUT also clearly marks a 
> boundary between eToys and Squeak. This can be done using method 
> categories and whatever means necessary. While it can not easily be 
> snapshotted separately we at least KNOW what it consists of.
> 
> - Work *begins* (I am not expecting a timetable, but I do expect an 
> ambition and a plan) on turning eToys into a separate entity that is 
> indeed "loadable" on top of Squeak. I would love to hear the technical 
> details on why this is hard (I don't doubt it, I just wonder).
> 
> Now... scenario 2 is VASTLY different from scenario 1.
> 
> regards, Göran
> 
> _______________________________________________
> etoys-dev mailing list
> etoys-dev at squeakland.org
> http://lists.squeakland.org/mailman/listinfo/etoys-dev
>