[squeak-dev] Re: package universes, sake/packages,
(first time) user experiences, etc.
tjohnson at iwu.edu
Fri Dec 5 19:42:07 UTC 2008
Hear, hear. This has the makings of a manifesto. Thus I have quoted
it in its entirety :)
On Dec 5, 2008, at 1:32 PM, Greg A. Woods; Planix, Inc. wrote:
> I'm glad I'm keeping this topic alive with my bug reports! :-)
> I must say though that the underlying complexity that shows up here
> mystifies me somewhat. I'm guessing there's some kind of politics
> under the hood that I'm not fully aware of.
> The basic problem for me is that I need the default package
> management tool, however it might work under the hood, to actually
> work reliably, 110%, all the time for everyone.
> I.e. there's a button for the user to press in the default
> 3.10.2-7179-basic package which starts the process and I think it's
> essential that everything from there work 110%, even if it means
> that what's available lags somewhat behind the latest and greatest
> of what's available.
> Also essential is a clean and safe way of upgrading installed
> packages. Default error handlers need to be in place to cleanly and
> safely back out any attempted upgrades which encounter any errors or
> conflicts. It would also be nice to have a de-installer and cleanup
> tools in the package manager too. Sure one can always start with a
> fresh image and load everything still wanted from scratch, including
> one's own local change sets, etc., and doing so has some of its own
> advantages, but for beginners and _end_ users an uninstaller is
> pretty much a necessary feature of any package management subsystem.
> The consequences of not having 110% perfection in the initial user
> experience of loading new packages into the now stripped down basic
> Squeak image means skeptical users will be driven away in droves.
> Perhaps it would be better to return to a form of the old pre-loaded
> bloated image, but this time adorn it with tools that would
> facilitate _unloading_ of unwanted packages by those who want to
> reduce the bloat. The last time I forayed with any dedication into
> the world of Squeak I was actually very happy to have a complete
> stable distribution image that came with all the available tools and
> toys already installed and tested. It meant I could jump right in
> and play or work with anything and everything. Now with 3.10 it's
> almost three weeks since I tried to "upgrade" and I'm still
> struggling. I hate to think what any more naive user than I would
> feel about this experience.
> There are problems with the pre-loaded image though -- looking at
> what's in the dev image now makes me want to avoid it because it
> contains some stuff I don't want, stuff which so far as I understand
> actually changes too much about the environment over and above the
> default "basic" configuration which want to work with.
> Squeak definitely needs a good strong leader, or at least a cohesive
> leadership, with a good and hopefully popular vision of where the
> core is going and how it's going to get there, and I think now with
> the "basic" default image being one without everything pre-loaded
> this vision has to stretch out over the basic package management
> issues too.
More information about the Squeak-dev