What if make things in such way, to allow different versions of same
package live in same image? And track dependencies between packages
using imports?

I discussed this idea on IRC channel with gulik (sorry cant recall his
name) about his namespaces project. I proposed to add 'imports' inst
var to packages.

Idea is simple:
- each package defined as a set of classes and methods.
- each reference to global name not declared it package itself, must
be declared in imported packages.

Only a few packages, like 'Kernel' don't require to import anything to
work. Others may require different set of packages to work.

All we need to change is a global lookup semantics: instead of looking
up the system dictionary, we should start looking for name from same
package , which contains the method.


On 23/07/07, Brad Fuller <bradallenfuller at yahoo.com> wrote:
> Instead of 'standard packages', what if there was an image consisting of the
> fundamental classes required -- the basic building blocks for all images.
> A "core" team could be responsible for this.  Perhaps it consists of the
> improved Squeak classes from the ST-80 image. Or fundamental classes, like
> the ones you listed, that most everyone agrees should be included. The
> fundamental classes wouldn't be packages, they'd just be the basic building
> block for other packages to be added.
>
> For some reason, I thought there was a team like this. Isn't there?
>
> Wouldn't it be technically feasible, no matter how hard it is? The question is
> what amount of work is acceptable for the community to pursue.
>
> brad
>
>
>
>


-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.