Hi Goran,

>> ...Desires about a loadable Morphic package...
> Yes, this is of course a very good end goal. Just don't get upset if it
> turns out to be too much work. I can settle for a Morphic cleaned up a
> bit. :)

What I'm doing is an eToys-free Morphic. Not sure if my work is of any
use in the big image.

>> I am volunteering for developing and maintainig the Morphic package.
>> I'm sure someone will volunteer for developing and maintaining the eToys
>> package. (Or maybe they all decide to move move to Tweak).
>
>
> Great! It has been noted. We (Doug and I) will be putting PackageInfos
> into the stream pretty soon and then we can register corresponding SM
> entries. But we will take care of that.
>
> And Juan - you need to contact Ned Konz. Or let me rephrase that - you
> *must* contact him. :)
> Ned is our eToys/Morphic guru, and he has also volunteered to Steward
> those parts.
>
> So please, pretty please with sugar on top - make a team with Ned. Ok?

Sure. Will do. I'll write him to see how my ideas fit into his.

>> I really can't work with eToys in. If the community chooses to keep
>> the big base image, at least I will need to fork, and just keep using
>> my 3.7 eToys freee image.

This is the most important thing I have to say. If the standard image 
includes
eToys I'm not sure how what I'm doing fits there. Anyway, I'd like an
"official" decision on this topic. I'm not sure if it should be from you, 
from
all the guides or from some sort of voting.

>> I believe the big decision  to make is: Do we prefer shrinking a big 
>> image
>> or adding packages to a small one? I vote for the second.
>
> Yes, I agree. But I also first just want people Stewarding parts of the
> image - that means taking care of it. I really don't care at this point
> if that part is actually broken out and made loadable - or if it is
> being maintained "as is". Humble goal to begin with.

As I just said, I'll talk to Ned to see how I can help.

> regards, Göran

Regards, Juan