I should have added (and now will) that all this same logic would (or at least should) apply to a minimal Tweak for the minimal image, as soon as Tweak becomes the framework of choice for Squeak.

Merely making the basic tools all work with a minimal Morphic would (or at least should) also make the task of porting over to Tweak much simpler.
-------------------------

>An alternative to including MVC, as the sort of minimal support, is to include a *basic* morphic package -- the kind of lean version that John Maloney always used for his tutorials.  It doesn't take a lot more than this (or it didn't back when I wrote them, heh, heh) to support all the normal system windows, and thus the development environment.
>
>I don't think it's much more code than the MVC framework.
>
>It could (with a bit of attention) be a nice intro to Morphic.
>
>It would let us finally package and remove the ST80 classes.
>
>It would mean that the move from "minimal" up would not be a change
>	of metaphor, but just stuff added.
>
>For that reason it would also be more likely that one could port
>	a morphic app back down to minimal if needed.
>
>and for *that* reason, it might even encourage usage of simpler Morph protocols.
>
>Just my 2 cents
>
>	- Dan