This proposal for "package groups" sounds pretty good to me.

"Kernel" is a well-understood term that seems like the best name for 
what it is: The smallest amount of Squeak code which can bootstrap 
itself into something larger.

The "base" level maps nicely to the "base image" term which Squeakers 
love to use.  I think it's been assumed that we would need this level 
of package group, and I like the term "base" for this.

"Core" is really the only new concept that Cees is introducing here.  I 
wasn't sure if it was necessary at first, but I like it more after 
thinking about it.  Roughly, it's the stuff which makes up an IDE.  To 
be more specific, we could sometime use the term "core developer 
packages" to refer to this pacakge group.

Anyway, it's definitely good to finally get some terms nailed down.  
I'm getting tired of people using the term "base" when they really mean 
"kernel", and then being misinterpreted by someone else, etc. :-)

- Doug Way


On Friday, March 7, 2003, at 01:45 PM, goran.hultgren at bluefish.se wrote:

> Hi Cees and all!
>
> (Did I accidentally drop the SqF list? Whatever, maybe good. These
> crossposts are probably - as Daniel said - mainly confusing. Lets keep
> *this* thread on squeak-dev)
>
> Cees de Groot <cg at cdegroot.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 17:24, goran.hultgren at bluefish.se wrote:
>>
>>> 1. Kernel. (True, False, Array etc)
>>> 2. Core. (DisplayScanner, FontSet etc)
>>> 3. Base (Browser, Workspace, Debugger etc)
>> Bad examples - 'core' being a barebones dev env, browser, workspace 
>> and
>> debugger will land there.=20
>
> Oh, sorry - I ended up "one step" wrong there. I agree that those are 
> in
> Core.
>
>>> 4. Stewarded packages not in base
>> These will land in 'base'. Of course, to the extent that we define
>> Stewardship as something official and, for example, differentiate
>> between a Steward and some dumbwhit who declares himself a Steward of
>> HttpView...
>
> Good - then we agree. I got confused because you wrote, and let me
> quote:
>>> Would "base" also be the boundary of everything maintained by 
>>> stewards?
>>> I mean - does base define what we call "Squeak"? Does it include all 
>>> of
>>> the stuff that we - as a community - considers to be "ours"?
>>
>> That's probably too much. As I said - lots of room for discussion 
>> here,
>> especially at this level.
>
> I interpreted this as - yes, there can be stewarded packages outside of
> base.
> So, I appended a little silly .project showing this model - allowed
> dependencies are downward.
> So Extra can depend on Base/Core/Kernel, Base on Core/Kernel, Core only
> on Kernel.
>
> Correctimundo?
>
> I was trying to fit in VMs, plugins, unofficial kernels etc. but...
> Well! :-) Feel free to make this .pr a bit more telling, add some
> arrows, text - whatever.
>
>>> Actually, I have heard of Troves and seen it in several of these 
>>> "tools"
>>> around the net but I honestly don't know what they really are (except
>>> for some kind of graph representation, right?). If you have a good 
>>> link
>>> I can check.
>>
>> I haven't checked out the theory behind it; I just noted that both
>> Freshmeat and SourceForge use it, and it seems to be a simple and
>> flexible categorization system. I think Eric Raymond came up with it,
>> dunnow whether that is good ;-), but it helps in searching for more
>> info: http://catb.org/~esr/trove/
>
> Thanks, Göran
>
> <packagegroups.001.pr>