[squeak-dev] Re: Updated trunk image (Squeak3.11-8472-alpha.zip)

Andreas Raab andreas.raab at gmx.de
Sun Dec 13 21:43:26 UTC 2009

Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:
>> I like it but we should have a community understanding what we'd like to
>> see in the "standard" image. It may be similar to FunSqueak but it would
>> be good if we'd have some discussions about the things we'd like to see
>> in it.
> I send many mails for agree on some.
> I want consensus, not doing my will
> We want the bigger image with the all things which run without odd glues ?
> Yes No 
> If the answer is yes
> Which one more ? Some in the image NOT should be ?

I think a good starting point would be to take the latest trunk image 
list the packages in it, add those that you've got currently in 
FunSqueak and then come up with a prioritization along the lines of:

1. Packages that should be in the core image
    (e.g., Kernel, Compiler, Collections)

2. Packages that should be in the default image
    (e.g., MVC, Universes, Sound, Games etc)

3. Packages that should be trivially loadable
    (e.g., Seaside, Aida)

Once we have a structure like that we can talk a little more if there 
are other packages that really should be part of one of the layers and 
then be a bit more realistic about what's achievable ;-) and finally we 
should just execute on that structure by doing whatever is necessary to 
get the packages into their proper layer.

   - Andreas

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list