3.7 Full: Developers or Media users?

Doug Way dway at mailcan.com
Tue May 25 16:37:01 UTC 2004

goran.krampe at bluefish.se wrote:

>Hi people!
>(I am just following this thread loosely)
>Dean_Swan at Mitel.COM wrote:
>>Just to add an opinion, my benchmark for what should be in a "Full" image 
>>would be either Squeak3.2-4956, or Squeak3.4-5170.  Basically, I expect a 
>>"Full" image to have at least everything that was in the 3.2-4956 image. I 
>>don't necessarily mean every class and every method, but at least all the 
>>major functionality.  I know that occasionally methods are depracated for 
>>good reason, and that's fine.
>>Now, neither of those releases included things like the RB, Monticello, 
>>etc, so while they're nice to have, I wouldn't necessarily expect it in a 
>>future "Full" image.  I would condsider things like that as developer 
>>"goodies" that could be omitted, but I would still expect the system 
>>browser, compiler, VM construction, PlayWithMe/Worlds of Squeak, EToys 
>>type stuff.
>Personally I think we should "keep things simple" so that Full is just
>Basic + more.
>Perhaps I misunderstood the discussion, but IMHO we shouldn't remove
>developer tools in Full that are in Basic.

I think you did misunderstand the discussion. ;-)  Full will most 
definitely be a superset of Basic, I don't think anyone argued against 
that.  It was just a matter of whether Full should be "Basic + more", or 
"Basic + a lot more".  For example, should the Refactoring Browser go in 
Full?  It's not in Basic at the moment.

To address Dean's point, the future Full images should have (at a 
minimum) all of the major functionality of previous images such as 
Squeak3.2-4956, etc.  The only exception I can think of are things that 
we specifically decide are obsolete and then remove, such as PWS.

As to whether we should have new additional stuff in the 3.7 Full image, 
Diego made an excellent case in previous postings for adding new media 
content to the Full image.  And Stephane and Noury (and myself) have 
argued that adding additional developer tools to the Full image is also 
a good idea.  We don't need to add every half-baked developer goodie 
ever written, but major tools like the RB would be great to have in 
there by default.  (We could also have a separate Developer-Full image 
with these extra tools, but that would require an additional maintainer 
and I think it's conceptually simpler to have just one true kitchensink 
Full image.)

If we don't get the "right" number of developer tools in the Full image 
for 3.7, I'd consider that a temporary problem, since this is the first 
time we've considered adding these.  We can work on getting it right for 
3.8.  I doubt that someone will gripe if something's left out that was 
never in Full before anyway.

(Another alternative is to restrict ourselves to adding developer 
goodies only to Basic, but I don't think we want to bloat Basic too much 
with things like the RB... Basic should be reasonably lightweight.)

- Doug

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list