Craig Latta <craig at netjam.org> wrote:
[SNIP]
>         I hope that the SqueakMap effort (carving the snapshot up into
> areas of
> responsibility, taking things out and putting them into packages) will
> get people used to the idea of snapshots with less stuff in them. It may
> even be that after some amount of the current reduction process, we can
> just make a swap. I would still think of SqueakMap support as "backward
> compability" though, since I'd personally rather move toward live
> interaction through message-sending, and away from files as a
> distribution mechanism.

Just a note about my POV regarding SM - the interesting part of SM is
the domain model, not the underlying distribution architecture nor the
web UIs, nor the package loader - even though the latter is of course
important regarding the "political" side of it. I mean, if the package
loader wasn't available SM wouldn't be used - so a good UI is of course
key!

But in the long run it is the *domain model* that is the heart of SM. We
will eventually get rid of the web UI, we will change the distribution
mechanism and persistence mechanism, and we will also introduce "local
maps" with "local modifications" etc. So things will evolve quite a bit
further.

But the domain model will hopefully not change much - at least not the
parts that is there now. Things will of course be added to it
(resources/dependencies etc) though.

regards, Göran