Removing Etoys (was Re: A process proposal for 3.10)

jvuletich at jvuletich at
Thu Oct 26 12:39:41 UTC 2006

This is really great to know!

Juan Vuletich

>>From: jvuletich at
>>Reply-To: The general-purpose Squeak developers
>>list<squeak-dev at>
>>To: Ron at, "The general-purpose Squeak developers
>>list"<squeak-dev at>
>>Subject: RE: Removing Etoys (was Re: A process proposal for 3.10)
>>Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 11:43:09 -0300 (ART)
>>Hi Ron.
>>You seem to believe there are people around who are wishing to implement
>>stuff just because others want it, not because of their own interest.
>>Well, I'm pretty sure there's none.
> That's not true.  I am working on RecurranceRule's right now.  I had the
> part I needed weeks ago, but I ditched it to try and get a more complete
> solution (which I will likely never use myself) so others will have it.
> And
> when I get done with this, and the project that spawned it, I will look at
> what is on the "hit list" that I could do easily (best to get the low
> hanging fruit first).
> I'm leaning toward a RoR type (but better I hope) implimentation in
> Seaside,
> because I think that would draw more people.
> So the truth is, you are right:  I plan on doing this for my own interest.
> My own interest in this system getting popular so we have more bodies to
> write code.  Imagine where we would be with one third the people who are
> working on Java right now.
> I'm only one person (with very little free time), but I don't think I'm
> alone in my thinking.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get FREE company branded e-mail accounts and business Web site from
> Microsoft Office Live

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list