Whither Squeak?

stéphane ducasse ducasse at iam.unibe.ch
Sun May 21 14:36:45 UTC 2006

I like the idea.
I would like 3.10 to be not compatible!


On 21 mai 06, at 15:46, Pavel Krivanek wrote:

>> I wonder why Pavel don't say he could build a basic console with  
>> no MVC and
>> no Morphic.
> I was on an official trip
>> I prefer use his old 3.7 kernel and not his new 3.9 , but is my  
>> taste.
>> Others could start from his newer.
> There's no conceptual difference between kernel image for Squeak  
> 3.7 and Squeak 3.9, but Squeak 3.9 includes m17n and some other  
> code that makes this image much bigger. Kernel image form Squeak  
> 3.7 is perfect starting point for some kind of applications like  
> PocketPC games. Shrinking operations in kernel image for Squeak 3.9  
> are less destructive and this image is definitely better in many ways.
>> Or take Boris procedure for a MVC image if they like MVC.
>> The hard thing (to me) is how you grow again.
>> How you go from Spoon (the favorite choice of many) or from Boris  
>> MVC or
>> from Pavel kernel to what we wish ?
>> How many people realize what current MC1 fails load (in small  
>> images what
>> could understand Monticello and friends) because class  
>> initialization is not
>> fileOut in right order ? (as in Network)
> From my point of view, the best next progress can be:
> 1a - take the kernel image for Squeak 3.9 and merge all relevant  
> fixes since 6719
> 1b - create simple mirrors browser for more comfortable work
> 1c - create some fixes like WideString problems with condesing of  
> changes etc.
> 2a - clean the kernel
> 2b - merge SUnit and relevant test
> 2c - create new important tests
> 3 - test the kernel image
> 4 - load everything back to create basic image. Don't create  
> packages, just simply load new classes and methods and initialize  
> it in the right order.
> (Task with the same number can be done in parallel)
> Then we will have nice UI independent kernel image and perfect  
> referential material for next packaging effort.
> Then we can do the same process with next packages like network  
> support, compression etc. Separate, load everything back.  It will  
> be the set of small steps but with every one we will get the next  
> clean package with the defined relation to the kernel and  
> prerequisites.
> Just an idea. I think that it's doable. If we reached the state  
> when we have consistent UI-less kernel image, why don't continue?  
> The packaging "from top" and standard Squeak development and fixing  
> can still continue because with every step we will have full image.  
> So, what about to establisth a team for that?
> If we will have kernel image, the set of "primitive" packages like  
> network, compression, UI independent MC and one big package "the  
> rest of Squeak", we can mark it as Squeak 3.10 and then begin with  
> version 4.0 - adopt many Spoon ideas, change VM and image format etc.
> -- Pavel

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list