<div dir="ltr">We should pull these in to trunk as soon as possible so we can get stuff tested before the release of a new image.<div><br></div><div>Can you do that Levente, as you seem most familiar with the changes you made ?</div><div><br></div><div>Karl</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Tobias Pape <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Das.Linux@gmx.de" target="_blank">Das.Linux@gmx.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi Levente<br>
<span class=""><br>
On <a href="tel:06.04.2015" value="+466042015">06.04.2015</a>, at 20:43, Levente Uzonyi <<a href="mailto:leves@elte.hu">leves@elte.hu</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> It would be better for these packages too, because they would get more<br>
> attention.<br>
> The SqueakSSL/WebClient changes I made in October[1] are still missing from the official repositories.<br>
><br>
> Levente<br>
><br>
> [1] <a href="http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2014-October/180251.html" target="_blank">http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2014-October/180251.html</a><br>
><br>
<br>
</span>I just now saw that there is more than just vm stuff.<br>
<br>
The problem with WebClient and SqueakSSL as of now is, that<br>
its maintenance-ship is, well, complicated. I went forth and<br>
pushed tiny changes to WebClient by just being somewhat on<br>
my own initiative[1].<br>
<br>
===========<br>
<br>
Dear Squeak Community as a whole and dear Ron as person possibly<br>
best fit to make a decision on this:<br>
<br>
Should we put the maintainer-ship of WebClient and<br>
SqueakSSL into the hands of the Squeak Core Team?<br>
<br>
<br>
===========<br>
<br>
Best<br>
-Tobias<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
[1]: There's a saying, initiative is discipline-lessness with positive outcome<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
> On Mon, 6 Apr 2015, Tobias Pape wrote:<br>
><br>
>><br>
>> On <a href="tel:06.04.2015" value="+466042015">06.04.2015</a>, at 18:59, David T. Lewis <<a href="mailto:lewis@mail.msen.com">lewis@mail.msen.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>>> On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Marcel Taeumel<br>
>>>> <<a href="mailto:marcel.taeumel@student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de">marcel.taeumel@student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de</a>> wrote:<br>
>>>>> Hey! :)<br>
>>>>><br>
>>>>> Can we add both to the update map (somehow?) and see if it works out<br>
>>>>> during<br>
>>>>> the following days/weeks until the release?<br>
>>>><br>
>>>> +1<br>
>>>><br>
>>><br>
>>> What is the point of moving these into the base image? Aren't these<br>
>>> exactly the kinds of things that you would want to have maintained as<br>
>>> independent packages that can be easily loaded from SqueakMap?<br>
>><br>
>> I think both these are Extremely Important (capital).<br>
>> WebClient as replacement for HTTPSocket (it already provides a compatibility<br>
>> layer; Andreas seemed to always considered WebClient to replace HTTPSocket),<br>
>> and SqueakSSL because you can't load anything meaningful on the web without<br>
>> SSL; github, twitter, most sites. And that's good.<br>
>> Plus we _finally_ could put the Plain Text Passwords for Monticello behind<br>
>> SSL…<br>
>><br>
>> Best<br>
>> -Tobias<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>