>> ...
>> Once you've got them together you can easily post your own *new* MPSS
>> to SqueakMap which combines the function of the other two.
>
> So basically, either users duplicate the integration work for
> combinations of packages not prepared before, ...

If a combination wasn't prepared and published before then, by
definition, that combination hasn't been meaningful enough as a
singularity for anyone to have performed such integration.  Since it
hasn't been done before, there's no duplication of work.

> .. or they publish their
> combination for others to reuse, resulting in as many new specialized
> combination packages ?
>
> First, this kinda defeats the purpose of a package system to me, and

You forgot to do step 1.  Reduce your expectation of SqueakMap from
being a "packaging system".  That's Monticello.  Instead, SqueakMap is
just a showroom from which you expect to be able to *easily* review
and learn about a package.  This is why I encourage SqueakMap packages
to not be shy about pop-ups to introduce the package to the user, even
utilising Squeaks multimedia capabilities in an engaging way if
possible.  Talk about on-line documentation and the attraction that
would be for new users (and me too!).

I really like what OSProcess does when it loads up, showing you the
current VM process and some docuementation.

> second, what difference does that make w.r.t MC configurations?

A one-way bridge from MC to SqueakMap would not be difficult or
time-consuming to build.  MC Configurations has been useful for me in
that bridge because it allows one-click generation of a
self-installing SAR (all packages in order) that I simply upload to
SqueakMap.  Of course, it might be nice to have a one-click including
SqueakMap upload directly from the image...



>
> --
> Damien Pollet
> type less, do more [ | ] http://people.untyped.org/damien.pollet
>
>