Going for the Full Monti (Re: How to improve Squeak)

SmallSqueak smallsqueak at rogers.com
Mon Jul 12 05:41:59 UTC 2004


 
Avi Bryant wrote:

> 
> On Jul 11, 2004, at 4:25 PM, goran.krampe at bluefish.se wrote:
> 
> > Avi? Comments? Is Monticello up to the task? :)
> 
> Of course not - nobody's tried it yet ;).  That is, there's 
> no reason in theory why it shouldn't work, but I have 
> confidence that we'll run into a whole bunch of problems at 
> the beginning, some of which I can predict (performance and 

	Oh, this reminds me after Chuck was loaded, any package 
	from SM was loaded very slowly. 

	Has anyone else experienced this slowness ?

	Just wondering if Chuck or Monticello or the combination 
	was responsible for the slowness.

> UI issues arising from Monticello not being designed to 
> handle at once the 50+ packages we'll probably want to divide 
> the image into), most of which I'm sure I can't.  But *will* 

	Talking of slicing, dicing and versioning, one would
	wonder if Monticello and Ginsu can supplement each other.
	Or are they just two completely different beasts.

	Maybe Goran, who broke the news of the first public release
	of Stable Squeak with an extensive and exclusive interview
	and now has used Monticello a lot can give some review ?

> Monticello be up to the task, in the long run?  Yes, 
> definitely.  I think this is a great experiment, and if we 
> try it in earnest, I'll commit some serious time to smoothing 
> over whatever problems we run into.
> 
> My point is this: I think it's a good time to try this out, 
> but we'll be in for a rough ride.  As long as you promise to 
> nag me to fix what's broken instead of getting discouraged 
> and giving up, then let's do it.
> 

	This is very encouraging. 
	Please keep up with the spirit.

	Cheers,

	PhiHo.





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list