[squeak-dev] Procedure for condensing sources
ma.chris.m at gmail.com
Sat Feb 19 19:46:25 UTC 2011
>> Well, will there be a very much code removed? I'm hard-pressed to
>> imagine we would save even 1MB of disk-space. But yet at the cost of
>> losing a continuity-of-record about Squeak; e.g., "what happened
>> between 4.2 and 4.3". Each release should be presented in terms of
>> its delta to the prior release. Isn't that a bad deal or am I missing
> I'm not sure about what your goal is with that delta. Condensing the sources
> is not bad, but IMHO it's late. It can be done now, but it's better before
> releasing the image (it's not specific to 4.3).
My goal is elegance, continuity, and useful information (deltas).
It's elegant, for Squeak 4.2, to consist of: a V41 sources file +
image + changes file. This is the traditional essence of Smalltalk
systems; sources+changes, and one which provides a "continuity" from
one released image to the next.
If we compress right before each release (instead of right after),
then wouldn't we just be deploying a "snapshot" of the state of the
system as of a particular moment in time. There would be no
"connection" to the prior release at all in terms of what maturities
the system made. And only because we wanted to save a couple MB of
I guess I should ask you to clarify your question you posed to me too;
what is your goal / reasoning. You said, "it's late" and it's "better
before releasing the image". May I ask why?
I don't think disk-space is a good answer because someone interested
in a, as-small-as-possible is not going to use a stock Squeak release
anyway; they're going to have to do a unloading / condensing /
More information about the Squeak-dev