[squeak-dev] Re: Ubuntu package maintainers help

Bert Freudenberg bert at freudenbergs.de
Thu Apr 23 20:34:07 UTC 2009

On 23.04.2009, at 20:50, Jerome Peace wrote:

>>> How does the squeak-plugin image differ from the other
>> squeak images?
>>> Can any squeak image be nominated for plugin duty or
>> is there
>>> something that the image has to know how to handle?
>> I view it as some sort of standards to which people can
>> rely to when
>> they embed Squeak projects (*.pr files) into web-pages via
>> <EMBED>...</EMBED> tags. Obviously, no project
>> works in any image.
>> Projects that are supposed to work with Squeak plugin has
>> to be tested
>> with a specific image and squeak-plugin-image is that
>> image.
> Umm. Ok. So the web-plugin image has a sort of contract with the .pr  
> files that want to be run in it.
> Is there any reason why we wish a squeak image for a  web-plugin?  
> Rather than an Etoys-image for the web-plugin. I ask this because  
> Squeakland seems to me to be the only one right now persuing this.
> AFAIK they have cornered the market.
> I seriously doubt the either the 3.9/3.10 branch wants to pursue  
> maintaining this.
> Ditto for the Pharo branch.
> Bert: Any insight into this point?
>> In theory, any image could be used with squeak-plugin but
>> it would
>> create a chaos. Creators of projects would not know to what
>> properties
>> of the image they can rely.

Right. The only line of images caring for project compatibility is the  
Squeakland Etoys version.

It would make the most sense to use Etoys as browser plugin image.

- Bert -

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list