> All fine and well. But my question is what about people with existing
> traits code (like myself). I don't really care about the
> implementation (it's OO after all). I care wether the stuff actually
> works or not.
>
> Cheers
> Philippe
>   
Dear Philippe,

Some members of the current ad-hoc release team, namely Matthew, and 
myself, are moving for a change of culture when it comes to moving 
Squeak forward.

This change is aiming to promote inclusiveness among of the different 
squeak user communities. Enabling projects to migrate between the 
different base versions currently in use, aiming to provide the 
underpinnings that will allow image building scripts to work in more 
contexts.

A lot of progress has been made on this front, with much more still 
happening in the background. Such radical changes in attitude will 
probably take a while to catch on, but I think this is the right way to go.

This means that Matthew's work on the TraitsUnload script is intended to 
include an excluded branch of the community. However this is not to be 
done at the expense of the Trait using community.

Given that the design of traits supports flattening, I think this 
inter-workability is acheivable. Matthew (and I if I can find time) will 
be working on some better tools support for loading traits in to both 
types of images.

At some stage I would like to do the same for Namespaces.... the tools 
can support loading namespace requiring code into non-namespaced images 
etc. Thus lowering the bar of conflict between the two  (or more) 
approaches.

best regards

Keith