Hi all!

First, as some of you know I am adding "resources" to SM1.1. A resource
is either a simple String embedded inside the map (a so called embedded
resource - meant to be used for meta information that is relatively
small and that needs to be available for all package releases, not just
the installed ones. Think dependencies here...) OR a resource reachable
with a URL.

Such resources can then be linked/associated with other objects in the
map (packages, packagereleases, categories etc).

"Andreas Raab" <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> > A very simple solution: put the instructions on the Minnow 
> > Swiki and give the reference in the description section of
> > the SM entry..
> 
> I don't think that'll work too well. We already have a URL which can be
> pointed at by the SqueakMap entry. Problems:
> * If people aren't online it doesn't work (such as me in an airplane ;)

The new SM also boasts a proper cache. So you will be able to "mirror"
over the complete contents of SM to your machine. And the master server
will also be such a mirror so you will not suffer from content on
servers not responding either. You will be able to have all package
releases and resources available locally.

> * The package loader (where it would be accessible) is very hard to use for
> installed packages, e.g., when you open it, it shows exclusively the
> packages you _don't_ have and it's a pain to switch it so that you see those
> that you _do_ have

We can easily fix that. A UI thing.

> * Practically speaking, using the package loader itself would be a pain if
> all you want is to quickly navigate to a particular tutorial/documentation
> (e.g., you need to open it, set it so it shows your installed packages,
> click on the one you want, click on the URL link, close the loader which is
> now probably behind scamper or so)
> * Editing a Swiki is a pain too (which is why I try to avoid it) - I hate
> those tiny edit-boxes and idiosyncratic shortcuts interspersed with weird
> html pieces (nothing against the collaborative aspects but the usability of
> Swikis is very close to zero)
> 
> I can probably come up with five other reasons why I don't think that using
> a Swiki page is not a good idea when you want to work and look for some bits
> of documentation, those are just a few which pop right into my mind.
> 
> Cheers,
>   - Andreas

regards. Göran