[squeak-dev] Packages, Packages, Packages

Igor Stasenko siguctua at gmail.com
Sat Dec 12 23:00:50 UTC 2009

2009/12/12 Miguel Cobá <miguel.coba at gmail.com>:
>> It is all up to you, whether update it or not. I don't see anything,
>> which i can't do by simply implementing it in my code,
>> putting my own knowledge and preferences how i think this should be
>> done best for installing my software.
> Ok, and that is precisely the mindshare that keeps squeak relegated to its
> current "selfish, self-satisfied, proud, no friends" niche.
> Lets have an open mind to new tools, squeak can't remain reinventing everything
> from scratch. That "non-invented-here" syndrome is mortal.

You are taking my words too literally.
Im not opposed to using existing tools. I just wanted to point out
that simpler is better.
If a simple installer script works in 99% of cases for me, then why i
need to care about using something else?
>From now, i don't see much need in a complex build scripts.
Most of installation configs i seen were a plain list of packages,
denoting the order in which they should be loaded.
This is not something, which requires installing advanced frameworks,
other than installer.
And of course, if i would need something more complex for installation
of my project,
then i may consider to use different tool and use it in my code.

>>> Cheers,
>>> Miguel Cobá
>>> http://miguel.leugim.com.mx
>> --
>> Best regards,
>> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list