> All? That sounds harsh. :) Has anyone actually tried it? I have
> presented my Namespaces for a group of Squeak/Smalltalkers here at
> SweSUG and they all liked it a LOT. So... I wonder.


Ok let us spend some time because we have so much time to get 
frustrated.
You can read in the archive the messages I sent when you proposed your 
namespace.

We do not like the idea that in a method body you can escape your 
current namespace
and access a class in another namespace. We do not want to have 
internamespace spaghetti code.
We prefer a model where import is done at namespace level (because this 
is the job of the namespace) and method body only see names imported as 
if they would be in the same namespace.

I hope this helps but I already said that this is in the archives and 
we always said it, again and again.

Stef