I think that this experiment is really important!!!
How can I help?
Do you need more packages?

Stef

On 10 oct. 04, at 17:44, Avi Bryant wrote:

>
> On Oct 10, 2004, at 4:30 PM, danielv at tx.technion.ac.il wrote:
>
>> Ok, did a first shot at it.
>> Some background on proposals to Squeak development:
>> http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3864
>>
>> UnstableSqueak main page:
>> http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3865
>>
>> which links to another page about more benefits of using MC instead of
>> the update stream.
>
> Thanks.
>
>>  I'd propose the following:
>>
>> The first release of Unstable Squeak should focus on extendibility - 
>> it
>> should include some of those extension mechanisms (like Services)
>> floating around. It should make it possible for various packages that
>> currently override stuff in Squeak to get integrated stop doing so.
>>
>> Does this make sense?
>
> Since you're right that nobody seems to be committing without such a 
> goal - sure, sounds good.  Let's get OmniBrowser in there too, and 
> John Pierce's #inform:/confirm:/request: automation.
>
> Avi
>
>