Speaking of stewardship...
danielv at netvision.net.il
Sat Feb 22 17:56:07 UTC 2003
Ok, guys, if anybody can help us out here, I think having Zurgle as a
SAR that simply installs into 3.4 is a worthy goal. It's probably the
best way to demonstrate that even if you don't like Squeak default look,
you're not stuck with it.
If someone can even just package it, then lots of eyes can look at the
bugs, and I'm sure they'll be shallow to someone.
Jim Benson <jb at speed.net> wrote:
> > Is Zurgle actively maintained?
> I've used the Zurgle code day in/day out since last June. The last bug
> reports posted on the Swiki were in that time period. I have either fixed
> the bugs and published the code, or decided to live with them. As far as I
> know, there are not any major outstanding issues that need to be addressed.
> However, Zurgle is only for 3.2.
> > It would be great if it and the other alternative look packages were
> > available via SqueakMap click-to-install. It's precisely the kind of
> > work that most needs to be clearly visible...
> I tried to convert the package into a SqueakMap form early on, but failed.
> Since that time 3.4 came out. There are two major bugs that make Zurgle
> incompatible with that release. First the event triggering mechanism
> semantics have changed, that's probably an easy fix. Second, the icon morphs
> in the flaps (and probably various other places) do not display correctly. I
> spent some time trying to hunt the problem down, but no luck.
> For the forseeable future, personally I'm only going to be using 3.2. As far
> as further development, I don't see that happening any time soon.
More information about the Squeak-dev