I am standing by Juan's proposal,
do you? (was Re: Removing Etoys, Morphic an
dway at mailcan.com
Thu Nov 2 06:16:47 UTC 2006
I support Juan's proposal and Goran's comments.
On Nov 1, 2006, at 1:51 PM, J J wrote:
> I guess I also missed the part where what Juan is doing means that
> squeak dumps EToys. Can't it just be a different image like the
> dev image? I don't think that means a fork, per se. ...
Right. It's not necessarily a fork, although it could end up being a
With Juan's proposal, EToys would be removed from the 3.10alpha
"basic" image which follows the update stream. (For better or worse,
it looks like the update stream will still be needed for the next
release at least.)
This doesn't mean EToys will never work with the squeak-dev 3.10 and
beyond images... Ideally, someone would create the loadable EToys
package for 3.10 and it would be part of the 3.10 "full" image.
I'd think it wouldn't be *that* hard to make a loadable EToys package
for 3.9... it's non-trivial, but I'd think it'd at least be no more
difficult than the unloading work Juan has already done. (Any
comments on that, Juan?) It is possible, though, that no one will do
it. And I certainly wouldn't expect Juan to do it, for example.
If a 3.9 EToys package is created, the 3.10 EToys package would be
created from that, adjusting for any Morphic changes from 3.9 to
3.10. (Or even better, it would be ported from the latest OLPC
version, although that would be a bigger merge.)
In any case, this sort of basic level of modularity is essential for
the survival of the squeak-dev image into the future, and for the
community to grow, IMHO. This sort of disentangling has various
other benefits such as getting us closer to working on top of Spoon.
More information about the Squeak-dev