On Fri, Dec 20, 2002 at 05:42:51PM +0300, Daniel Vainsencher wrote:
> I always have two squeak images running - (at least) one development
> image, and one mail image, with my favorite Celeste goodies and filters
> loaded. I don't normally load experimental code into the mail image, to
> avoid screwing it up.
> 
> Layers/environments, as you say, could theoretically give me this
> partitioning of code in the image, but in practice, I screw up my
> development images often enough in ways that this doesn't solve
> (resources, tight loops without possibility for breaking) that I'd still
> prefer to trust the OSes address space protection.

<snip>

I do much the same thing as you do.  However, I wasn't thinking about 
development images; my "mail" image might have other packages that help
me use Squeak as a media environment (eg: Connectors).  These packages
may be very well tested with the base image, but might step on each
other's toes.  Even if things seem to work, I can't be sure that things
won't explode later (without looking at all the methods in each add-on
changeset to make sure that they don't appear in another add-on changeset).
In other cases, the breakage might be immediate and evident. Environments 
would address this problem.

Joshua