Craig Latta wrote:

>  > Or there weren't very many interested people. I'm not sure there were;
>  > I'm  not sure there are, actually.


>     Yeah, that was my point.


very many - 1

I'm very interested in spoon. As far as I understood the imprinting 
process, you'll have your development image and a target image in which 
you want to reside only needed behavior - base classes for bringing the 
vm up and your application. With a proper set of TestCases and Mocks of 
your application, one should be able to build a release version of one's 
mighty little tool which
- guarantues small download sizes
- doesn't fill memory up with lots of unneeded objects, classes, yaddayadda
- makes squeak based applications feel less smalltalkish... (for the 
user of your killer application).

wxSqueak - clients are often used to there OSses gui (no matter how 
use-friendly it is)
seaside - why use 12MB server (os-)process if you could go with 5?

And I think I'm not alone. No matter how wonderful squeak is for 
educational purposes - it's also an awful tool for developers.

The reason I have not participated in the discussion until now is, that 
first I burnt my fingers already (whined about morphic in my early 
days), second I had the *feeling* that your attitude towards spoon and 
interested people is "It's ready when it's done. I'll let you know" and 
third is the "everyone who wants a developer-friendly squeak wants an 
EToy|Tweak|Croquet-less squeak". But the point is: squeak has (in my 
eyes) the potential to be both (and with spoon, one could take the 
latest cool enhancements from the fullblown colourful VM-generating, 
Compiler-compiling, web-serving, wiki-hosting squeak).

Kind regards, Markus

-- 
http://reauktion.de/archer/