Squeak book !

Bruce ONeel beoneel at bluewin.ch
Mon Sep 16 09:26:24 UTC 2002


I'll put one vote for a reasonable collection of base
modules that lets beginners download one thing and
get started.

We can argue endlessly over what that list
should be :-)

cheers

bruce

goran.hultgren at bluefish.se wrote:
> Hi all!
> 
> Avi Bryant <avi at beta4.com> wrote:
> > > Just to add some history, when the chapter was commissioned
> > > (er.."requested") Comanche was far less done. It got a lot more done over
> > > the period of the writing, but it's still not in the image.
> > 
> > Why isn't it?  It's clearly used far more than PWS is, and it includes
> > several classes (SocketStream, ConnectionHandler, TimeStamp) that I
> > frequently use even in non-web contexts.  Including the base Comanche
> > classes in the image seems like a big win to me.  But maybe that's just
> > me.
> 
> I agree. But on the other hand we need to stop thinking about the
> "image" and start thinking in the terms of Modules!
> 
> I have always thought that we are splitting up the image into Modules
> and the border of the image will then be less clear. Should we have some
> form of "blessing" of Modules meaning that they are considered to be
> Modules we all together try to maintain and that we, as in "the Squeak
> community" consider them to be of some fundamental importance/use? Such
> Modules would then typically be included in the "base distribution" of
> Squeak. Or we simply stop including Modules in the base and instead make
> the base "minimal" and then let the user/developer use SqueakMap to find
> what he/she needs. Just like the apt system in Debian. They also have
> collections of Modules suitable for different "tasks" - that might also
> be an interesting model.
> 
> Anyway, just thinking aloud.
> 
> > Avi
> 
> regards, Göran



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list