Yes I suppose you are right, it would.  That certainly adds to the side
of the argument (a largely internal one on my part) that says that this
should be seperately packaged.

That brings up a question really about how we see 4.0+ going forward
(assuming that's where we really go for the tiny initial image with
external packages) for interrelated packages.  StarBrowser is perhaps an
extreme but not unusual case in Squeak in that it interlinks with many
other parts of the image, parts that may currently be standard but would
likely be extracted and seperately packaged in the future.

In the short term maybe this does need to be in a seperate package. 
However that's going to cause an explosion of packages I think, packages
that handle the intersections between existing packages.  In the long
term however I think we need to come up with a mechanism that can allow
these intersections to be packaged into one or the other package but
dynamically be applied depending on whether or not the other package is
installed.  In other words, on installing the package that includes the
intersection the installer checks to see if the package that the
intersection applies to is already installed.  If it is then the
intersection is installed.  If it is not, the intersection package is
somehow added as a "dormant" payload to the installation system which is
directed to install it if the other package is installed.  Similarly the
intersection package needs to be cleanly removed if the other package is
later removed and registered again with the installation system.

Perhaps this is overly complex.  Maybe I'm trying to fix a problem that
doesn't exist (well right now it really doesn't, it looks like it might
in the not too distant future though).  I would be interested in hearing
comments and especially simpler solutions.  I'm still pretty new to
Squeak and there's a lot of which I'm still not aware.

Ken

On Tue, 2003-01-21 at 07:13, Hernan Tylim wrote:
> > Hernan:  I don't think it makes much sense for this to exist as a
> > seperate package so I would like for you to include this in the
> > Jacaranda package if you haven't already been working on this.  If I add
> > any further refinements I will let you know.
> 
> Ken,
> 	First of all, Thank you for looking into Jacaranda. It makes me very glad
> to know that other people is looking something I've done.
> 
> 	I didn't study your change set nor StarBrowser yet so I don't know if what
> I am asking is a silly question, but, Will this change set add StarBrowser
> as an installation requirement for Jacaranda?
> 
> Thanks
> Regards, Hernán
>