Hi all--

	Luciano writes:

> How are we going to [make big streaming architecture changes]? Are we
> ever going to make such a big refactoring? Is such a big change ever
> going to make it to the update stream?

	I think these changes would be best accomplished as part of a major
release, in which a new snapshot is provided. In particular, a release
in which a minimal snapshot is introduced. We're going to have to adapt
everything to it (or at least confirm successful loading from SqueakMap)
anyway. Currently, I think it'd be best to do this as release 5, after
the image format change of release 4, but I could be talked into
swapping them.

	Andreas writes:

> ...absolutely _don't_ touch or change anything in the existing
> subsystem (this is one of the major problems with Flow - last time I
> tried it created some serious problems with clients which weren't
> migrated which makes loading it a risky and painful exercise...

	As I have said many times, it was never my intent so far for the Flow
package to be loaded into a production system. I released it so that
people could see, in a virgin release snapshot, what the architecture is
like, and gauge whether they wanted to make the modest changes it
implies to their applications.

	In general, a conservative incremental approach where nothing breaks is
good. However, I think there are some changes which warrant wholesale
adaptation. At some point, trying to do everything by applying an update
stream becomes an obstacle to progress. I think we reached such a point
some time ago with this issue.


	thanks,

-C

--
Craig Latta
http://netjam.org/resume
craig at netjam.org
[|] Proceed for Truth!