Hi,

On 14.04.2015, at 14:18, karl ramberg <karlramberg at gmail.com> wrote:

> We should pull these in to trunk as soon as possible so we can get stuff tested before the release of a new image.
> 
> Can you do that Levente, as you seem most familiar with the changes you made ?
> 

Although I am not levente I went ahead and pushed SqueakSSL and WebClient into
the trunk. Lets see how it turns out.

Best
	-Tobias

> Karl
> 
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi Levente
> 
> On 06.04.2015, at 20:43, Levente Uzonyi <leves at elte.hu> wrote:
> 
> > It would be better for these packages too, because they would get more
> > attention.
> > The SqueakSSL/WebClient changes I made in October[1] are still missing from the official repositories.
> >
> > Levente
> >
> > [1] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2014-October/180251.html
> >
> 
> I just now saw that there is more than just vm stuff.
> 
> The problem with WebClient and SqueakSSL as of now is, that
> its maintenance-ship is, well, complicated. I went forth and
> pushed tiny changes to WebClient by just being somewhat on
> my own initiative[1].
> 
> ===========
> 
> Dear Squeak Community as a whole and dear Ron as person possibly
> best fit to make a decision on this:
> 
>         Should we put the maintainer-ship of WebClient and
>         SqueakSSL into the hands of the Squeak Core Team?
> 
> 
> ===========
> 
> Best
>         -Tobias
> 
> 
> 
> 
> [1]: There's a saying, initiative is discipline-lessness with positive outcome
> 
> > On Mon, 6 Apr 2015, Tobias Pape wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On 06.04.2015, at 18:59, David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Marcel Taeumel
> >>>> <marcel.taeumel at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de> wrote:
> >>>>> Hey! :)
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Can we add both to the update map (somehow?) and see if it works out
> >>>>> during
> >>>>> the following days/weeks until the release?
> >>>>
> >>>> +1
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> What is the point of moving these into the base image? Aren't these
> >>> exactly the kinds of things that you would want to have maintained as
> >>> independent packages that can be easily loaded from SqueakMap?
> >>
> >> I think both these are Extremely Important (capital).
> >> WebClient as replacement for HTTPSocket (it already provides a compatibility
> >> layer; Andreas seemed to always considered WebClient to replace HTTPSocket),
> >> and SqueakSSL because you can't load anything meaningful on the web without
> >> SSL; github, twitter, most sites. And that's good.
> >> Plus we _finally_ could put the Plain Text Passwords for Monticello behind
> >> SSL…
> >>
> >> Best
> >>      -Tobias