Hi!

Stephane Ducasse <ducasse at iam.unibe.ch> wrote:
> Hi goran
> 
> I was recently reading the old code of ginsu and this was small and 
> simple. Really simple, simple, simple...simple. I guess that you could 
> plug everything you want behind because you have a separation between 
> representation and run-time objects.

Sure, but the point with Magma is that you don't need an external
representation.
It can store Squeak object as they are.

> We could have packages and bundles now. I think that people should look 
> at Ginsu to get inspired by simplicity. We missed an opportunity there. 

Hmmm, I am not so sure about the "missed opportunity" part.

I recall that Joseph was unsure about licensing (he hadn't dropped the
idea of doing something commercial with it) and IMHO he wasn't very keen
on working "in the community" - he seems more of a lone wolf and there
is nothing wrong with that of course, especially since he is a very
competent wolf.

BUT... similarly to what happened with 3.3a that kind of setup may
quickly turn into an uncomfortable situation. These things and
architectures really *need* to be broadly anchored in the community. And
if there are cruical areas that one or two people more or less controls
due to their unique insight and competence - it is very important that
those individuals really are interested in working *in* the community.
Like Anthony for example - I am truly impressed with his work and I can
promise you that such a dedication will *not* go wasted - we definitely
are going to lift his work into Squeak as soon as we can manage.

And btw - Ginzu/Monticello are source management tools. What SqC wanted
in 3.3a was a namespace/module mechanism - not a source management tool.
Sure, those things overlap but in principal I agreed with the decision
of SqC. The fact that Modules later "sunk" is IMHO a different story.

> Now that there is less tension around packages (I call them package 
> because there is no scoping associated)
> this would be good to look at them and understand that this is the 
> minimum we need.

Looking is always good. :-)

regards, Göran