> Whoever cares about Morphic.
> 
> As I explained before, Etoys development happened outside of squeak.org 
> since 3.9. And even if we start fixing it now it will take quite some 
> time before it is fully usable again.

Exactly the point, Etoys already forked.  Stop holding onto an old 
rotting version in Squeak that isn't used, take it out, it doesn't 
belong there.  People who want eToys have their fork where it is maintained.

> Besides, it's not like all other subsystems have active maintainers, so 
> there's no point in singling out Etoys.

It's an example, so yes, there is a point.  Any system that isn't part 
of the core that all apps need, especially those that aren't maintained, 
and especially those that make a mess of things when people are trying 
to improve the core, should be removed.

>> Ditto, why is so hard for some to see that eToys isn't Squeak, it's an 
>> app build on Squeak?
> 
> Because it's not. Wish it was, but it isn't. I guess you never actually 
> understood the code. Nobody can even draw a clear line between what is 
> Etoys and what is not. And no, the system categories mentioning "Etoys" 
> are not it by far.

But it should be.  Yes, it isn't, but they already forked, so it doesn't 
matter anymore. eToys doesn't belong in Squeak anymore, it's just 
rotting there.

>> It doesn't need to be in Squeak at all, any version.  What it needs is 
>> to be able to be loaded into Squeak like any other application.  
>> There's just no justification for it being in the core image; none.
> 
> You're welcome to help make it so. It's just not as easy as ripping it out.

Pharo's doing it, Juan did it.  It can be done.

> I think the discussion so far showed once more that there is wide 
> agreement for Etoys having a major place in the squeak.org community. 
> But the details of how it should be maintained are not well understood.

I think it's shown there is wide disagreement and since eToys already 
forked I can't understand the reasoning behind the "let's keep it" side 
expect to say they're just resistant to all change.

> Unlike more recent Squeak additions that are nicely modular, Etoys was 
> not developed as an "application" running "on top of" Squeak. It rather 
> evolved in close symbiosis with the rest of the system, in particular 
> the Morphic UI framework. I don't think we have enough resources to 
> separate the two while keeping them alive. Maybe the best use of 
> development resources would be to consider the current Morphic+Etoys a 
> unit and work on an alternative, leaner UI framework? So the two would 
> not step on each other's feet?
> 
> Ideas (and even more actual help) welcome.
> 
> - Bert -

Honestly, I don't care anymore.  eToys was just brought up as an example 
to point out the difference between the "let's make progress" side vs 
the "no change monolithic image" side.  I already left Squeak in peace, 
I'll be using Pharo and anyone I introduce to Smalltalk will never see 
Squeak because they'll start with Pharo.  I'm tired of apologizing for 
Squeak being a kids toy.

Ramon Leon
http://onsmalltalk.com