Hi Goran,

> Not sure what you mean, but that is what I said. :) I know that I keep
> bitching about openness and all that. Can't help it. Perhaps this is
> related to the fact that I am in this community all by "myself" and you
> guys are working on company paid projects. Different perspectives I
> suppose.

Perhaps. I'm just more interested in getting work done than explaining 
myself. Just have a look at this goddamn never-ending thread! ;-)

> I should have written "what does Tweak need more?" As in what you know
> *today* it needs or you know it will need. I just want a grip on how
> "hard" it would be to have the "official Squeak" move more towards Tweak
> - regardless of the current abstraction discussion.

Define "need" ;-) No, I am dead-serious. I do not know what you would define 
as "Tweak needs it". I can guess though, perhaps that you mean what do the 
widgets in Tweak need (this seems to be the major thrust of the question). 
This is easiest answered by looking at the MC pakets (those are for obvious 
reasons in dependency order). What it needs is:
* The asynchronous event architecture
* The syntactic sugar for method annotations and events
* The graphics support (as soon as this is in place)
That's about it.

>> > The Islands stuff (which of course sounds nice too)? This would be
>> > interesting to hear about.
>>
>> I'll tell you as soon as I find out. Right now I'm still in the midst of
>> getting that part of the architecture right.
>
> *You* are in the midst of getting that right? Surely you mean "the open
> Tweak project" is? ;)

I think this is one of the differences between the two of us - I have no 
problems taking responsibility for my actions. I am doing this and if it 
goes wrong I will take the blame. The project architecture is (for good 
reasons) my baby - if you want to find the most screwed up part of Squeak 
look at projects! I am going to show that projects can be small and 
beautiful. Modular and efficient. I'm working with the whole team on this 
(incl. Dan who is working on the modularity aspects) but it is my 
responsibility, my baby. And you know what - I really like it that way ;-)

> (I couldn't help myself. Forgive me! It was
> totally tongue in cheek. A beer on me next time we meet? :) )

Heh, sure. But when will this be? (I figure you won't be travelling much 
these days)

Cheers,
  - Andreas