BTW I'm a bit amazed that we do not draw any conclusion of the failure  
in social engineering and the rest in 3.10.
Someone coined it a long agony. And I thought he has  a point.

This is strange since 3.9 and 3.10 used the same process and tools. So  
of course I would love to have the best of both world
changeset and packages.

Stef


On Feb 2, 2008, at 12:05 AM, Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:

> TO ALL:
>
> Just we meet with Matthew and some words with Craig.
> I also see Steph and Andreas sending feedback here or in release  
> team list.
>
> It's important we reach some agree for next 3.11.
> We only exchange ideas , trying to see the best road to follow.
>
> I repeat my vision.
>
> One day I wish to have a very small and smart thing.
> I open workspace and say "Pier" and all loads and I in bussiness.
>
> Maria wish play "DressTheDoll" with Etoys, then she type  
> DressTheDoll (and
> the thing only loads the needed to she).
>
> Some talented music (many Squeakers ) choose the last Stephane  
> Rollandin
> have and voila, he is doing jazz, tango or Nepal music (and not load  
> Etoys
> or Web)
>
> Sure many more examples.
>
> Now we have 3.10 , some just discover could load several things  
> automatic,
> some don't know 3.10 lack some packages living outside the base image.
>
> 3.11 could cut more packages and load again if needed.
>
> The goal is going closer to MinimalMorphic.
> Then to Kernel.
> Then to Spoon.
>
> I apologize if Craig or Pavel think different, sure they could explain
> better.
>
> The point is if we should start from 3.8.2 (without Traits and  
> Monticello)
> or we should continue from 3.10 is now.
>
> The tentative image I put in ftp is only a first prototype idea and  
> was
> 3.10.
>
> But some believe could have sense do some similar from 3.8.2
> Kind of 3.10 without Monticello and Traits.
>
> So we listen all ideas, wait all help.
>
> ========
> Next meeting is scheduled tomorrow 2 February 2008 on IRC
>
> 8:00 Phoenix 16:00 Rosario 13:00 Europa
>
> ======
>
>
>
>
>