ducasse wrote:

> My impression is that the scripts are in another dimension
> because why wouldn't possible to say
> 
>     (PackageStef giveConfigNamed: 'stef3.3') load.
> 
>  From the conceptual point of view you want package (with dependencies 
> express in configmaps)
> to have better flexibility but why would you need load scripts. After 
> you will use package that are empty
> and just define a configMaps and you will get group of packages.
> 
> My feeling is that load scripts are mechanisms.
                                       ^^^^^^^^^^
                                       important remark

Yes from a user point of view I'd like do deal with a package as an 
object. I just want to load it in specific version.

I do not want to think Unix-like (shell scripts etc.).

The package should know what it needs. Not an external script.
Of course there could be packages which basically do nothing besides 
loading other packages.

On the other side implementation wise (and from the point of feasability 
in terms of acceptance within the Squeak community) the way Göran is 
persuing might be the best for the foreseable future.

In any case: A great thank you for all of you for woking on these 
portant things.

Even a suboptimal solution, but one which deals with version numbers and 
works reliably is a big step forward.


Hannes