Removing Etoys (was Re: A process proposal for 3.10)
jvuletich at dc.uba.ar
jvuletich at dc.uba.ar
Wed Oct 18 12:11:45 UTC 2006
I don't think what you say is doable. We don't have the means to break all
dependencies on eToys, and at the same time keep eToys working. It would
need the same kind of work as to make it unloadable and loadable back.
When I realized how much refactoring is needed to do that, I stopped the
MorphicSplitters effort and quited as the Morphic Steward.
What I propose can be done. I did it for 3.7. You can download it from
http://www.jvuletich.org/Squeak/EToysFreeMorphic/EtoysFreeMorphic.html . I
believe Pavel did something similar (although I haven't looked at it.
Anyway, I'd like to be proven wrong. Are you volunteering?
> When resource is scare, the smarter come out ;)
> How is big etoys?
> And How is deeply integrated in Squeak?
> If Etoy is not so big (as I remembered), we can simply start to "cut its
> wires" from Morphic and let it aging around.
> We can start creating a mechanism to deprecate some methods.
> By the way the deprecation engine seems to me very important to do.
> We can do this thing with less then 8 hours of work in my own opinion,
> I suggest to rethink our apprach and to adopt a "Panta Rei" (verything
> changes - the philosophy of Heraclitus).
> We should start to plan the new Squeak version WITHOUT throwing away the
> We can start taking bad thing alone in a room, putting heavy doors in it,
> and then
> prohibing them to exit :)
> The other developers will start stopping using EToy in a smooth way.
> After a while we can think how to dismiss them... or not.
> In my own opinion frequently Squeak home change, so the problem will solve
> smootly without so much pain.
> Let's discuss on this approach.
> On 10/18/06, Juan Vuletich <jvuletich at dc.uba.ar> wrote:
>> So, this seems a good time to remove eToys from the official release. I
>> can team with Pavel and Stef (and any other volunteer) to do this.
>> However, it will take some 20 or 30 hours of work, and I think we need
>> to know if this will be adopted, otherwise I won't spend time on it.
>> I guess the Board could lead, and make a decision, or enlight me about
>> the decision process for issues like this one.
>> Juan Vuletich
>> Marcus Denker wrote:
>> > The SqueakLand people don't use 3.9, and I am quite sure they never
>> > Etoys 1 is past live-cycle. There is 3.8/OLPC which is a cool Etoys
>> > image for eToys1.
>> > For the future, there needs to be a new eToys2 that is maintainable.
>> > There is a very cool demo of a next-gen eToys based on Tweak.
>> > That seems, to me, much more the thing to take a look at for the
>> > eToy system.
>> > Marcus
> "Just Design It" -- GG
> Software Architect
More information about the Squeak-dev