On Mon, 13 Dec 2004 21:06:45 +0000, Hannes Hirzel <hirzel at spw.unizh.ch> wrote:

> > Really? If it's a distinction I take it that VMMaker, Games, Celeste,
> > Balloon3D, Wonderland, and Scamper are *not* well-packaged and can *not*
> > be unloaded easily. Is that what you're saying? Because otherwise why
> > would we have exactly those in basic and none of the other ones?
> >
> >  - Andreas
> 
> Andreas,
> 
> I would say the point Avi is trying to make is:
> 
> As SqueakMap, SUnit and Monticello  are well packaged they do not
> actually count towards the complexity of the base image. People who want
> an even more basic image can unload them.
> 
> So he is not saying that other official packages are not well packaged.

Yes, that's exactly right.  And by the same logic, I would now have no
problem having VMMaker etc in basic either, since they are now (post
3.5) well packaged too - as I said, I don't *care* what's in basic and
what isn't as long as I can trivially unload some of it.  Or what's
not in it, since I can trivially load what I need.

Avi