<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 9/21/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Matthew Fulmer</b> <<a href="mailto:tapplek@gmail.com">tapplek@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On Thu, Sep 20, 2007 at 05:45:32AM -0700, GeertC wrote:<br>><br>><br>> Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:<br>> ><br>> ><br>> >> It's not only technical, is political too.<br>> >> Many people don't like Etoys go out.
<br>> >> As more visible thing inside Squeak is Etoys<br>> ><br>> ><br>><br>> I think everyone agrees that eToys should be an optional component and not<br>> part of the Squeak/Smalltalk core image, if this is not the case I would be
<br>> really really surprised :)<br><br>Etoys wouldn't be the first thing I would want to take out of a<br>core image. That would be (in order):<br>- MVC<br>- Browsers<br>- sources and changes file support<br>- Etoys
<br>- Compiler<br><br>A good core image would be Morphic and a package loader. Usable<br>and customizable. I wouldn't want to distribute anything more or<br>less to a non-technical user.</blockquote><div><br><br>You'd leave Morphic in? o_O
<br><br>How would you load packages without a compiler or sources/changes file support?<br><br>Michael <br></div><br></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><a href="http://people.squeakfoundation.org/person/mikevdg">http://people.squeakfoundation.org/person/mikevdg
</a><br><a href="http://gulik.pbwiki.com/">http://gulik.pbwiki.com/</a>