How about we just make the "expandToFullSize" script a well-publicized SqueakMap package that Doug owns.

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Vainsencher [mailto:danielv at netvision.net.il]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 4:27 PM
To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
Subject: Shrinking alpha image (was Re: Proposal to get to the triad)


Actually, I don't object at all to shrinking 3.6alpha. I do (somewhat)
object to starting to do releases with two image, for the simple reason
that it's more work for you to get both perfect. However -

1. You're the release master, and your word is law. If you actually do
want to release two images, no problem.
2. There is absolutely no problem at all that I can see to making
releases of only the shrunk version, and supplying an official
"Basic->Full" (or whatever we're calling them) script. I definitely
agree that it's better than maintaining the other direction. Mostly
because that makes what we actually maintain (the released image)
simpler, which is really the benefit we desire.

Daniel
> >> it is useful to start applying these removal scripts to a 'core' image
> >> right away. The script that moves core -> base will be small, and it 
> >> is
> >> quite feasible to keep it as a single manual script for the coming 
> >> time.
> >> By the time that gets unfeasible, we'll have a largish script 
> >> containing
> >> a lot of stuff we learnt about how to load a number of unrelated
> >> packages. This will provide valuable input to what is needed in the 
> >> area
> >> of dependency mechanisms, so that when refactoring the script, we'll
> >> land at a) practical dependencies, and b) have a mini-package that
> >> brings core->base ideally just by listing dependencies).
> >>
> >> Summary: removal/replacement pairs that have gotten the necessary
> >> reviews are immediately applied to the core/base split, by removing 
> >> the
> >> package from 'core' and doing an appropriate update of the 
> >> (monolithic)
> >> core->base script.
> >>