Against wastefull forks (Re: Taking Ownership of Squeak...)
Ted Wright
wright at en.com
Fri Mar 9 23:36:46 UTC 2001
Dan Shafer wrote:
>...The monolithic nature of the image -- which is what triggered this entire
>discussion -- mitigates against expecting the current "owners" of that code
>base, Disney and SqueakC, to expend the resources necessary to make Squeak
>accommodate the needs of business programmers, personal productivity
>application designers, and others who are less concerned with the educational
>and multimedia aspects of the product that of necessity earn Disney's focus...
While I agree that full modularization (as you suggest) and building an image from
scratch and loading code as needed (as Paul Fernhout suggests) would be nice,
I'm not sure a fork is necessary. I wonder if the recent image partitioning tool that
Dan Ingalls is adding won't address most of the problem.
It looks to me like this will eventually automatically do much of the modularization
work, and make image shrinking easy enough for mere mortals to do.
Ted
Ted Wright mailto:wright at en.com
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|