Craig,

This is a great project...I am currently trying to build some stuff up
from a base image (in an automated fashion) by loading a sequence of
packages.  What I would like to see is the squat image versioned,
followed by an effort to start packaging up subsystems in the base
Squeak system such that they can be loaded into a squat image.  Some
sort of infrastucture to be able to do that in an automated fashion from
some sort of configuration description could be built along the way.

Once you've got a reasonable 1.0 version of the squat image, I would
like to take on a subsystem or two from base squeak and make it loadable
in the squat image.  Also, I think such a process is likely to be the
most viable path to get to a modularized squeak.

- Stephen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org 
> [mailto:squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On 
> Behalf Of Craig Latta
> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 9:25 PM
> To: squat at netjam.org
> Cc: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
> Subject: Squat progress report
> 
> 
> 
> Hi--
> 
> 	In keeping with the spirit of the project, this message 
> is brief. :)
> 
> 	I've got a 600KB Flow-enabled snapshot; I think it 
> could be 100KB, we'll see. I'm using the simulator/tracer, as 
> well as good old-fashioned shrinking.
> 
> 	I'm still waiting to hear from others who are working 
> in this general area (ideas, results, anything really). There 
> were Alejandro's recent messages, but also rumors about 
> related work by Andreas and Dan.
> 
> 	For mailing list details, see <http://netjam.org/squat>.
> 
> 
> 	thanks,
> 
> -C
> 
> --
> Craig Latta
> improvisational musical informaticist
> craig at netjam.org
> www.netjam.org/resume
> Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)]
> 
>