[squeak-dev] Re: Updated trunk image (Squeak3.11-8472-alpha.zip)
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.
More information about the Squeak-dev