> > * Do people *want* to work in modules all the time?
> > They aren't now.
> > (SqC, for example)
> -- I think it's a one-time shot of pain, to get the
> user's base image module-ized.  If that user chooses
> to start with an already-module-ized image, then no
> pain.  The experience of working in modules can be
> basically the same as working in Squeak.  If you like,
> you can simply ignore the ModSqueak browsers, and use
> the regular Squeak tools.  Things stay in sync
> invisibly, so that later if you want to use the (er,
> not-yet-existing) program delivery facility, you can.
Paul's right. We did a lot of work getting things synchronized. If we 
have events triggered at the right semantic level, (e.g. after a method 
is compiled instead of when the text is accepted in a browser), 
synchronization becomes much easier. These changes, though, are part of 
the bigger SWT project.

> 
> > * How do we handle mixed situations (either the
> > transition period, or a
> > stable state)?
> -- someone on this list (Henrik?) mentioned letting
> the ModuleManager be a listener for change-oriented
> events.  This would give ModSqueak the basic 'hooks';
> from there it's a development decision how many
> situations so support.
Hmmm...that would be the ModuleOrganizer, and not the ModuleManager.
> 
> > I'm saying this because it seems we might enter this
> > transition time any
> > time now, I think we should have an idea on how.
> -- I did a good bit of experimenting/exploring earlier
> this year, and I believe one can view the current
> ModSqueak as part-way through this transition.  For
> example, I'm not sure, but I think that when Joseph
> and I were exchanging code on a frequent basis, he was
> working mostly in Squeak, and I was working mostly in
> ModSqueak if you see what I mean.  That situation
> arose because I was trying to test out the ModSqueak
> coding tools, and Joseph didn't need to be bothered
> with all the ghastly image-destroying bugs that were
> in there ... .
- exactly. Now, I can even do my work in VW, VA, Dolphin or any dialect 
which I've ported the semantic model to, and which has a socket client.
 FYI - for my ESUG demo, we shoehorned Flow into ModSqueak. Since it 
was an older Flow version, the exception handling trounced on the stuff 
needed for SUnit, so I can't do any more work on it...