On May 9, 2008, at 9:45 AM, Andreas Raab wrote:
> Merik Voswinkel wrote:
>>> A subsidiary issue that those of you that are fun-enthusiasts must  
>>> get together to solve is keeping the fun stuff alive and working.  
>>> If you think it is important, you have to treat it as such and  
>>> maintain it. No one else has any obligation to do so.
>> Yes, it could be easily solved by renaming FunSqueak to become  
>> 'Squeak' and have all the developer image stuff in there as well.
>> But we seem to want to release images for ourselves nowadays, not  
>> one for the general public anymore, like the Squeak Central team did.
>
> I think the main sticking point here is what the *default* image is.  
> There is nothing wrong with minimal and/or specialized images;  
> that's both to be expected and helpful. To give an example, in the  
> Croquet SDK you actually get two images: The "Croquet" image which  
> contains everything out-of-the-box and the "Homebase" image, which  
> is minimal and tucked away in the deployment directory. So that (for  
> people who care) they can start with a fresh image, load *just* what  
> they want and need and use that but with the default image being the  
> full experience.
>
> Cheers,
>  - Andreas
>
I fully agree that the "default" image is the main point here, if not  
the only point. I agree with needing specialized images, I depend upon  
them to do my daily work.

Merik