What we want with Squeak?

Tim Rowledge tim at sumeru.stanford.edu
Wed May 7 04:46:19 UTC 2003


"Bill Schwab" <BSchwab at anest.ufl.edu> wrote:

> I'll jump in on this one, because I am also _slightly_ uneasy about the current direction.  Ok, packages, and the ability to cleanly remove them is GREAT - bring it on :)  However, I would very much like to not have to trust Squeak Map, or worse yet pick though what is sure to become several hundred, if not thousands, of packages to build an image.  I want to download the whole mess at one shot and get going.  Being able to chop out things that don't interest me is a BIG plus.
>
You won't have to trust SM nor wade through thousands of packages.
Remember, the declared aim is to release three kinds of image, all built
from the same base:-
1) the baby bear image, with almost nothing in it except enough to be
able to say "I exist!" and load more stuff. OR something like that.
2) the mummy bear image, with all that plus the typical things one would
expect in a Smalltalk developers system. UI, browsers, tools of many
flavours, etc
3) the big fat, TV watching couch potato daddy bear image with
everything (pretty much?) that is in the current release image.

The crucial bits we are trying to achieve right now is the ability to
a) make the baby bear image
b) add all that other stuff in a reliable manner

One day I imagine we will be able to unload packages as well but I
personally find it a little harder to work out how to
remove-without-breaking than load-without-breaking.

tim
-- 
Tim Rowledge, tim at sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
Long computations that yield zero are probably all for naught.



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list