On Mon, 13 Mar 2006 23:27:04 +0200, Daniel Vainsencher
<danielv at techunix.technion.ac.il> wrote:
>[...] the current proposal sounds like 
>we're giving up on users ability to update their images.

In case I wasn't clear enough - yes, we are. At least for the
development cycle, as far as I'm concerned not for the maintenance
cycle.


>
>If we're going to go for a better system that has the benefits of MC and 
>supports image updates, we need to actually catalog, discuss, and solve 
>those nitty gritty problems that bug both sides of the development 
>process at the moment. 

Yes, we do. But that shouldn't halt the ongoing development of Squeak.
That's why I propose some emergency measures to keep it moving, while
at the same time we see how to make MC better suited to the job (or
write a new tool specifically for this sort of work, whatever). 

Could you explain a bit about the Gemstone model you are referring to?
I only have marginal GS exposure, and I'm sure that I'm not the only
one.