goran.hultgren at bluefish.se wrote:

> > whether ImageSegments are to be supported in the future or not (are they
> > still of any use after the image is super-condensed and packages can be
> > added?)
> 
> Eh, well I use ImageSegments as a very good and simple object storage
> mechanism.
Hmm, ok, I suspect that migh5 be quite widely true. Why would I worry
about the matter? Only that there are places in the vm code that would
be a little simpler if we dropped it. Not a huge amount simpler but it's
always good to simplify when possible.


> ;-) Personally I am all for moving ahead as long as we have alternatives
> in place (like for example regarding ImageSegments).
Good. It's not like we would be retroactively destroying all copies of
vms capable of supporting the older images, just not producing any new
ones. Actually I suppose that with the vm code out in packages we could
even make a small effort to keep the older vm code still usable through
that mechanism.

tim
-- 
Tim Rowledge, tim at sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
A bug in the code is worth two in the documentation.