=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Hultgren?= <goran.hultgren at bluefish.se> wrote:
> Good point. I was thinking of adding a "pseudo category" called "[all packages]"
> or something. Would that be good? If we keep it on the top it would work almost
> as the "all" does in method categories.
Sure, that's good.
BTW, the actual package list has very few lines. Maybe you should lay
things out differently. For example, sub categories pane under
categories pane, no sub-sub-categories (or much smaller), and pacakge
list pane on the upper right, taking up 0.66 at 0.5 of the window?

> > 3. Since the GUI as it is now already allows people to get at properly
> > packaged software, it's already half way to what I want to have. So I
> > would really like to have an interface to upload/update a package -
> > that
> > would enable us to immidiately start using it for any packages.
> 
> Do note that SqueakMap doesn't store packages. It was very intentional - my view
> is that we simply can't agree on a central repository (or technique to use for
> it ) there are too many options available (SCAN, CVS, source repository
> solutions etc).
Agree with your reasoning completely. 

> regards, Göran

Daniel Vainsecher