[V3dot10] Re: Loading packages in 3.10beta 7143

[Lex Spoon]

Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> writes:
> Nice claims (which I personally can't confirm; my success rate of
> loading stuff from Universes has not been significantly higher than
> loading from SM), but what does that have to do with whether SM should
> be part of the image or not?

You are probably using a development version, not one of the stable
release.  During development, there are many packages that do not
load, and help is certainly welcome in improving that situation.  When
a release comes around, I either make trivial fixes to get packages
loading, or I reject them, but I do not leave anything in that does
not at least load.


I agree none of this speaks to whether the SqueakMap browser should be
included, just to whether it should be people's default package
loader.  My knee-jerk reaction would be to suggest it goes into "full"
images but not "basic" ones, but I don't feel strongly about it.


-Lex