Hilaire Fernandes writes:
 > Cees De Groot a écrit :
 > > On 7/3/06, Hilaire Fernandes <hilaire at ext.cri74.org> wrote:
 > > 
 > >> So know I still wonder is the objective of Tweak is still to replace the
 > >> morphic layer or did the objective changed?
 > > 
 > > 
 > > As far as I know, that's still the objective.
 > > 
 > > However, IIRC Andreas has stated at at least one occasion in
 > > unequivocally clear words that Tweak is primarily for his own projects
 > > (Croquet, Etoys(?)). In other words, he is not going to commit to
 > > spend time to work at Tweak for the community (knowing him, he might
 > > still do it, but we can't count on it ;-)).
 > 
 > Okay, I was not aware of that. It is sad if Tweak developers are not
 > interested to get Tweak maintstream in Squeak. In this case (I hope it
 > is not the case), bascicly there are only two options:

>From my understanding, they were concentrating on their own
goals. There's a lot of work in getting a major package into
mainstream Squeak, that work could be a distraction to them.

The Tweak developers are using Morphic for development tools, they
might be tempted to co-operate by work on bringing Tweak's development
tools up to Morphic tools levels.

If Squeak was a set of packages then licencing would be easier because
we could deal with each package individually. Also the licencing of
the core image would be less important because being small it would be
easier to replace.

People could then work with a mostly cleanly licenced image with a few
SqueakL packages that were externally loaded while boot-strapping a
fully cleanly licenced image. GNU began development as a set of tools
that ran under proprietary Unix.

Bryce