[squeak-dev] Re: [Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!

Karl Ramberg karlramberg at gmail.com
Sat Mar 6 20:47:01 UTC 2010

Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez skrev 2010-03-06 20:58:
> El vie, 05-03-2010 a las 15:45 -0800, Randal L. Schwartz escribió:
>>>>>>> "Miguel" == Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez<miguel.coba at gmail.com>  writes:
>> Miguel>  Then Squeak refuses to remove Etoys from base image, even is in process
>> Miguel>  the update and resync of Etoys with upstream squeakland code.
>> I do believe the intent is to make etoys unloadable.  If you've heard
>> otherwise, can you poin at it, so that I can be up to date?
> Yes, it is unloadable since a month ago like someone else said, but that
> doesn't make Squeak a vehicle for deploying commercial apps? Again, as
> in another thread I said, the fact you can disassemble the image doesn't
> mean that you want to disassemble it for deployment.
> The modularity is one thing.
> The easy to deploy web/desktop images is also important.
> You can give a full installed desktop linux server with gui and pidgin
> and firefox and thunderbird and everything. That doesn't mean that I
> would accept it for deploying my email server using it. I prefer to
> start from a minimal linux install and add it only the email server. Not
> search everything that I don't need and delete it manually.
> That is why I refer like not commercial-friendly. There is not roadmap
> that you can rely in order to base your app for a couple of years if you
> don't know what direction Squeak will be going with the new board.
> You don't have a defined board blessed support for oldstable images.
> What will happen to current deployed 3.10 applications when 4.1 is out?
> and when 4.2 is out? As you surely know, that is a very important thing
> for selling a solution using Squeak. And the one-man minimal images
> can't be relied on, (not because of the people behind that efforts they
> are brilliant, but because the truck factor is crucial here) a community
> effort is needed for the minimal images to be successful.
> You don't have well defined deployment setups (the ones that Torsten
> have made for one-click install are very good, as are the ones that you
> can find in the lists archives, but no one place where you can go and
> review all your options for deployment and not just for using a Squeak
> image) Check: http://rubyonrails.org/deploy is a link in the home page
> of rails. for squeak you must search the lists.
> You don't have recipes for deploying Morphic apps, without all the
> things you don't need to give your customers like squeakmap, universes,
> monticello, etc. Again, we return to use the unload scripts and hope
> that you get a working image.
> Finally I apologize for stating that Squeak don't care for uses other
> than educational ones, but *my opinion* is that don't ease the use for
> commercial uses either.
>> Miguel>  If the board refuses to remove etoys that is for me that they have a
>> Miguel>  preference for the educational use of squeak than the commercial use of
>> Miguel>  squeak.
>> As a member of the board, I can tell you this is *not* an intent.


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list