On Tuesday 21 January 2003 10:40 am, Ken Causey wrote:
> Assume for the moment that Celeste was packaged.  When
> either Celeste or Star Browser packages are removed (when such
> capability becomes available) wouldn't these classes be removed and
> you would therefore lose these messages? 

Yes.

>  More specifically you
> would lose only some of the messages which might lead to a broken
> Star Browser installation (maybe not, I'm not sure). 

If you had Celeste installed, then installed SBCeleste, then 
de-installed Celeste, then yes, the one menu choice wouldn't work 
right.

>  Additionally
> if you reinstall Celeste you will be missing the linkage (assuming
> the intersection is packaged with Star Browser as it is currently).

That's right.

> Am I wrong?  What piece of information am I missing?

No, you're right.

However, Squeak's focus so far hasn't been on *un*installing things. 
This is a hard problem in general. We're instead trying to make an 
environment where a small image can be combined with selected 
packages to make the desired composite image.

My packaging of the SB add-ons has been done with this goal in mind: 
you should be able to come up with a list of packages you want in an 
image and load them in a well-defined order to get what you want.

Especially with packages and the additive nature of Squeak image 
building, I generally look at images as disposable. We have (various) 
other persistence schemes (projects, change sets, DVS, storage of 
categories in SB (don't remember if this works yet), etc.) to handle 
more long-lived artifacts.

When it's easy to build up new custom images I don't care about 
unloading packages.

-- 
Ned Konz
http://bike-nomad.com
GPG key ID: BEEA7EFE