Hi diego

for our projects this would be great. After I do not know if this is 
really what other want.
What I can tell you is that when I applied the removals the net support 
was not there anymore.
But this should be possible to reload it.

Stef


On Wednesday, May 7, 2003, at 09:23 PM, <diegogomezdeck at consultar.com> 
wrote:

> Tim and list,
>
>> <diegogomezdeck at consultar.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Let's talk about wich tools we need to make the process smooth. I
>>> offer to program it.
>> Good man!
>>>
>>> Initial set of features:
>>> - publish a changeset to the "repository"
>> I think this is partially covered already; by mailing a changeset to
>> the list the sqfixes filter already grabs it and 'all we need' is a 
>> way
>> to treat the results as a convenient repository. I'd claim that the
>> current format is not too convenient because you get huge lists and
>> little navigation support to help one find any interesting or relevent
>> entries. My theory is that we can do better and that possibly using 
>> the
>> FTP access already available would be good. Another possibility that
>> has just occured to me is that a variation of SM would have some
>> virtues. Instead of simply installing any change (danger!) it would
>> fetch the whole bundle of messages and changes associated with a
>> bug/fix/enh.
>
> I was thinking about using a swiki page.  This page is *only* changed 
> from
> squeak.  In this way we can continue working in a similar way that 
> MCP/KCP
> but much more automatized.
>
> The squeak will parse and modify the page based on the features we're
> talking about (changeset, comments to it, fixes to it, etc)
>
> What about that?
>
> Will the HTTP and the HTML stuff removed from the base-image?
>
> Diego
>
>
>
>