agree at carltonfields.com wrote:
> 
> Joachim writes:
> 
> > Right... partially. It's OK to ask whether something that's not
> > *that* far away could be included.
> > Of course, one can debate whether empowering Squeak for commercial
> > use is a major effort, a minor one, or whether it is at all
> > impossible. But these are issues for a debate, not something that
> > can be dismissed in such an off-hand manner.
> 
> Absolutely, but I didn't dismiss anything in an off-hand manner.

Sorry for misunderstanding you (with this and other points).

> >> No, take it from the author of several best-selling commercial
> >> games -- Squeak is no toy.  The potential is unlimited.  And,
> >> compared to working in, say, MPW or codewarrior there is
> >> much to be said for Squeaking in lieu of building anything from
> >> scratch.
> 
> >Right. Now where do I get the how-tos, tips, and tricks of the trade
> >how to do that?
> 
> Right here.  And it would be cool if you'd contribute even more of
> your own.
> This thread is a great example, which has already generated serious
> alternatives for some.

Well, for some time I will not be able to contribute much more than
triggering such threads. I'm still trying to find my way.

> We need to be patient, and we need to be proactive.  Squeak is not yet
> in a "they will come" position -- it still has to be built.  But its
> wonderfully put together as is.  Much of the problem is the lack of
> documentation, and that's where the community can help -- we who are
> using it can start contributing what we find, whether as informal
> e-mails to the listserv, or more serious contributions to the system.
> Let's do it!

Right!

Regards,
Joachim
-- 
Please don't send unsolicited ads.