[squeak-dev]( picoVerse-:( ? MIT vs LGPL ? ) )

Kjell Godo squeaklist at gmail.com
Thu Mar 27 17:05:03 UTC 2008


Which is better if you want Smalltalk code to be includeable in the base
Squeak?

MIT or LGPL?

I have a large Generator Package(s) that is all marked up as GPL in Dolphin
Smalltalk.

I think that this Generator stuff could take a place alongside Collections
and Streams
in the base Squeak / Croquet image.

I am reluctant to think about porting from Dolphin to Squeak.  I tend to
sign myself
up for things that I can't do.  I'm gung ho for about a day and then reality
sets in.
It's easier just to talk.  To dream.  But I guess the idea that it might get
into the Squeak
image makes it more attractive.  To try.  To even think about.

( Some resistances come to mind.
Perhaps it's not up to the generally accepted practice of including
practically zero
documentation?  And could not be included for that reason?  The change log
is
too big.  There are long rants in there.  poetics.  nonsense.  the included
text
looks like some Mandelbrot set?  With too many usage examples and ideas
written into the comments? )

Are there any automated ways of going from Dolphin to Squeak?
File out Class by Class and fileIn and copy method by method?
If I strip out some stuff from Dolphin Packages would they just fileIn to
Squeak?
But if there are no loose methods in Squeak Packages then the whole thing is
impossible.

It would be cool if there was some standard way to transfer code between the
different Smalltalks.  But I guess they are just too different.  And the
idea of
making a commonality comes and goes.  But never sticks.

-Kjell
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20080327/6469c66d/attachment.htm


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list