[ snip Colin's interesting discussion of splitting PWS from Squeak ]

You raise a bunch of good points, Colin.  But one thing that concerns me,
even more than *who* maintains a package, is that there is no *proof* that a
package will work, once you get it back into your image.

Take PWS for example.  I don't know the slightest thing about this code.  If
I were to grab a Squeaky clean image (heh) that did not include PWS, then
install the PWS package from SqueakMap, what guarantee do I have that the
code is "stable" and ready for use in my image?

I think that any "standard" stuff that is a candidate for being stripped
from Squeak and subsequently stored in SqueakMap, needs to have a standard
series of tests that can be run on it to *prove* that the code works when
you install it.  Perhaps a series of SUnit tests would suffice to give us
all the warm fuzzies about each package.

In any case, I'm pleased that you have taken on part of the task of reducing
the monolithic 3.2 -- this work is very important for business-oriented
Squeakers.  Thank you.

Cheers,

---==> Chris