[squeak-dev] Re: Updating key morphic/etoy features in the main Squeak release

karl ramberg karlramberg at gmail.com
Fri Mar 13 22:55:20 UTC 2009


Sounds ok to me :-)
It's a noble task for a brave soul


Karl


On 3/13/09, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
>
> On 13.03.2009, at 17:00, Karl Ramberg wrote:
>
>> On 2009-03-13 10:03, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>>> On 13.03.2009, at 04:32, Robert Hawley wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Rita
>>>>
>>>> Thank you for your reply.  It is good to hear that the Etoy
>>>> protagonists would be interested in back-porting Etoys
>>>> improvements to the main Squeak release.
>>>>
>>>> However, do we know if the Squeak release builders want any
>>>> improvements to morphic - or are they going to cut back to a
>>>> minimorphic?
>>>
>>> Well, I am one of the "Etoys protagonists" and just got re-elected
>>> by the community with my best-ever result (http://tinyurl.com/squeak2009
>>> ) so I take that as a vote pro Etoys. It still will be a major
>>> chunk of work, but at least those most opposed to Etoys have their
>>> own way of working on a lean Squeak now.
>>>
>>>> I still don't know what questions to ask about how things are
>>>> managed. I have been looking around more - there have been some
>>>> changes with lists recently that I didn't know about. (I notice
>>>> that the lists are not very used as yet.) I still don't have much
>>>> clue as to where to find things about what goes into the main
>>>> Squeak release, who controls it, or where to look to see the
>>>> current state of things. Advice would be welcome.
>>>
>>> You are not alone. The truth is, there never has been a clear
>>> process ever since Squeak became community-driven. But it looks
>>> like the time is ripe now for change. The community has clearly
>>> voted for Andreas whose main campaigning platform was to establish
>>> those processes.
>>>
>>> Anyway, merging the latest Etoys back into a squeak.org release
>>> will probably take a while. Well, unless we find enough volunteers
>>> with copious amounts of spare time ;)
>>>
>>> If somebody is interested, the first thing to get an overview would
>>> be to review the change logs (we started with Etoys 1.0 = Squeak
>>> 3.8 and are now at Etoys 4.0):
>>>
>>> http://etoys.laptop.org/src/
>>>
>>> I'm pretty sure that rather few "system-level" methods were
>>> touched. One could start by cherry-picking "interesting" changes/
>>> fixes into 3.11.
>>>
>>> For a full integration we probably need to packetize Etoys first,
>>> so we can at least compare Monticello packages between Etoys and
>>> Squeak. Comments welcome.
>> There is Pavels Minimal Morphic with Etoys split out based on Juans
>> packages but those are probably 3.6  or 3.7, but is's a start :-)
>> I'm not sure what is considered Etoys in those packages tho...or
>> what considered Etoys for that part at all.
>
>
> Well, for the sake of this discussion I just care about merging all
> the improvements and bug fixes we did in the last 2+ years in the
> Etoys image back into the packages that make up the official Squeak
> image, and vice versa. This approach worked well back in 3.8 and so I
> expect it to work again.
>
> For this to succeed we don't really need to define what part of Squeak
> is Etoys and what part is not.
>
> - Bert -
>
>
>
>



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list