[squeak-dev] Something in the update process damages the background

Frank Shearar frank.shearar at gmail.com
Thu Sep 12 15:23:24 UTC 2013

On 12 September 2013 16:15, Chris Muller <ma.chris.m at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 5:31 AM, karl ramberg <karlramberg at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 4:13 AM, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Sep 11, 2013 at 2:52 PM, karl ramberg <karlramberg at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > I agree with this. Look for a user set background, if nil do default
>>> > fill,
>>> I don't understand your proposal.  The background just _is_ whatever
>>> it is.  We set it during the release process.  When someone downloads
>>> a release image, they either "set the background" to a color,
>>> gradient, pattern, or bitmap of their choice or, they don't.  How are
>>> you going to "look for a user set background?"  When would such a
>>> thing be done?  Upon loading Morphic?  Why?  Why not just leave it as
>>> is ?
>> I'm not able to check right now but isn't the background held in a instance
>> variable ?
>> If the current background instance is lost or corrupt, the defaultBackground
>> should be used.
>> It would be nice to have all setting like this as part of a theme setting
>> one could file out and import into other images.
> It already is -- see the Preference Browser "save to disk" and "load from disk".
>> I don't think this should be a ReleaseBuilder setting.
> While I wish a "transparent" background was supported, it's not --
> every image has SOME kind of background.  Unless we want it to be...
> random? then I can't see how setting the background wouldn't be part
> of the release process.

Setting the background should _always_ be part of the release process,
and _never_ part of simply updating a package. I do think we're all
starting to violently agree.


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list