Maloney wrote:

> Good analysis! I like your idea of filing in applications directly
> from an FTP or HTTP server at the click of a button. However, I'd
> suggest using the Squeak Wiki to advertise applications and their
> URL's rather than Squeak Central. That way, application information
> can be updated by the application maintainer directly as often
> as necessary. If this information were maintained in the image
> by Squeak Central (say in the System Workspace or a similar window),

This discussion reminds me of one idea I had some time ago.
I thought we needed a more flexible source code management
scheme.  A method source or a class comment containing hypertext
links is indeed an important revolution, but why should we
have the restriction that only text in .sources and .changes
is directly referenceable from the image?  This builds some
wall in the middle of the documentation.  I.e., imagine one
downloaded the image&source and is happy with the documentation
in the source, and wonders what those *.sqdoc files on the
ftp server are.  After some time he or she clicks on a link
to a piece which is in this *.sqdoc and now the more tough
question arises, what's the real difference.  Well, I wrote
a lot of technical documentation and I would hate if I were
forced to structure my texts accordingly to some exrernal
condition and not to the structure of my thought.

But after thinking on it some time I came to the conclusion
I don't know how to fight against this.  All ideas I could
think of led to even worse complications :-///

Boris