<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 1:46 PM, Frank Shearar <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:frank.shearar@gmail.com" target="_blank">frank.shearar@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><span class="">On 21 April 2015 at 10:39, karl ramberg <<a href="mailto:karlramberg@gmail.com">karlramberg@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Great.<br>
> Seems we need to issue a update map before these gets pulled in by updating.<br>
><br>
> Can also remove Universes package ?<br>
> That also needs to be done in a update map, I think<br>
<br>
</span>I _think_ that back during the 4.4 release cycle we reached consensus<br>
that Universes would last one more cycle. That would means its removal<br>
time is now.<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Yay </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
Don't forget that we need to bump the VersionNumber package version<br>
when this happens (or our "version number" will decrease).<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Ugh, I'm not sure how that is done...</div><div><br></div><div>Karl </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
frank<br>
</font></span><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><br>
> Karl<br>
><br>
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:54 PM, Tobias Pape <<a href="mailto:Das.Linux@gmx.de">Das.Linux@gmx.de</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> Hi,<br>
>><br>
>> On 14.04.2015, at 14:18, karl ramberg <<a href="mailto:karlramberg@gmail.com">karlramberg@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>> > We should pull these in to trunk as soon as possible so we can get stuff<br>
>> > tested before the release of a new image.<br>
>> ><br>
>> > Can you do that Levente, as you seem most familiar with the changes you<br>
>> > made ?<br>
>> ><br>
>><br>
>> Although I am not levente I went ahead and pushed SqueakSSL and WebClient<br>
>> into<br>
>> the trunk. Lets see how it turns out.<br>
>><br>
>> Best<br>
>> -Tobias<br>
>><br>
>> > Karl<br>
>> ><br>
>> > On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Tobias Pape <<a href="mailto:Das.Linux@gmx.de">Das.Linux@gmx.de</a>> wrote:<br>
>> > Hi Levente<br>
>> ><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<br>
>> > > from the official repositories.<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > Levente<br>
>> > ><br>
>> > > [1]<br>
>> > > <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>
>> > 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<br>
>> > outcome<br>
>> ><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<br>
>> > >>>>> 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<br>
>> > >>> 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<br>
>> > >> compatibility<br>
>> > >> layer; Andreas seemed to always considered WebClient to replace<br>
>> > >> HTTPSocket),<br>
>> > >> and SqueakSSL because you can't load anything meaningful on the web<br>
>> > >> without<br>
>> > >> SSL; github, twitter, most sites. And that's good.<br>
>> > >> Plus we _finally_ could put the Plain Text Passwords for Monticello<br>
>> > >> behind<br>
>> > >> SSL…<br>
>> > >><br>
>> > >> Best<br>
>> > >> -Tobias<br>
>><br>
>><br>
>><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
><br>
<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div></div>