> My own guess is that the last discussion we had on Namespaces was so long, 
> impassioned, exhausting, and ultimately inconclusive that no one wants to 
> get drawn into another one, particularly since there's nothing new to talk 
> about.

The issue wasn't even remotely addressed by the namespace proposal. To sum 
up that part of the discussion it seems that two lines of code could "fix" 
the issue:

    Object classPool: Smalltalk.
    Smalltalk := nil.

Duh. No namespaces, no globals, no nothing. Now what? Have we significantly 
improved the situation? I don't think so. "Removing globals" without 
addressing what class variables and pools mean is a pretty useless exercise. 
And the namespace discussion is orthogonal to it.

Cheers,
  - Andreas