On 27 July 2013 00:14, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
> On 26.07.2013, at 21:35, "David T. Lewis" <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Jul 26, 2013 at 01:15:07PM -0700, Casey Ransberger wrote:
>>> FWIW, ST80 was kind of a mystery for me for months after coming into
>>> Squeak. The name suggests that it's somehow the whole system that was
>>> released in 1980. I have a feeling that renaming it MVC would save some
>>> confusion for newcomers.
>>>
>>> Is there any super compelling reason not to just rename it MVC?
>>
>> If you rename it, you disrupt the version history in Monticello. How about
>> making packages be objects, so we can document these things properly in
>> the package comments?
>>
>> Dave
>
>
> In theory it should work fine to "adopt" the latest ST80 package as the parent of the new MVC package. We might want to test that first though ..,

Bearing in mind that the way to get ST80 _into_ the image in the
mid-term will be by going to a catalog and saying "I'd like the
original MVC please". The fact that the package names are a bit crufty
won't matter all that much then.

frank

> - Bert -