Keith Hodges wrote:
> This counter example, code languishing in the Testing repository since
> 2006 had failed to be integrated, even though it has been loadable from
> Universes for most of that time, and was positioned as the new head for
> everyone to work from. If people were to use it as the new head then
> there wouldn't be any integration needed at all.

That's a strange sense of entitlement you have here. Why do you think 
anyone would heed your "positioning as the new head for everyone to work 
from"? This is but one of the many versions of SUnit and I'm not sure 
what would make it so special. In fact, given that it's not used in 
*any* fork today it seems especially peculiar that you seem to be 
claiming it to be base of development for *all* of them.

> My point is that by putting the philosophy first, that is what leads you
> to have tools like MC for interchanging code in the first place, and it
> is what led me to spend time working on MC1.5. SUnit falls in to the
> same category of tools that essentially have to be common across forks.
> 
> But if no one else adopts even a similar philosophy what's the point.

I'm not sure what your philosophy is. If it is "let's make sure we use 
the same SUnit version across different forks" then you should rejoice: 
As of today, Squeak uses the same SUnit and SUnitGUI as Pharo! We just 
reduced the burden of integration for anyone who has dependencies on 
either of the two.

Cheers,
   - Andreas