[squeak-dev] Re: Installer vs. CodeLoader

Bert Freudenberg bert at freudenbergs.de
Thu Feb 25 13:55:02 UTC 2010


On 25.02.2010, at 14:32, Andreas Raab wrote:
> 
> Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>> Levente already stated he preferred Installer. So with me that's 2:1 against extending CodeLoader. Any other opinions either way?
> 
> +1 for Installer. The purpose of CodeLoader is to load code in an application, thus signatures, verification etc. Let's use the right tool for the right job - CodeLoader was specifically designed to support (Etoys) projects in browsers, Installer specifically to load arbitrary code from arbitrary places during development.
> 
> Cheers,
>  - Andreas

Okay. I pushed System-bf.265 which backs out the additions.

Sorry Edgar - this is just about CodeLoader, not about your other, valuable contributions. Keep it up! :)

- Bert -





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list