I am standing by Juan's proposal, do you? (was Re: Removing Etoys, Morphic an

Laurence Rozier laurence.rozier at gmail.com
Thu Nov 2 12:19:54 UTC 2006

I can only speak for myself, but I suspect there are others who basically
support what you're saying Doug and at the same time like to see a stronger
committment from the board towards achieving "this level of modularity". I
had said that I didn't support Juan's proposal "as is" because it didn't
acknowledge the factors you've addressed. What do I mean by "stronger
committment"? I have an idea, but I'm not 100% sure because I think it
depends in part on some factors which are not clear to me:

-The Board position on interacting with the major code forks
-The Board's committment to Spoon.
-Last but most significant in my view, is the Board's position on Squeak
kernel ownership which I discussed in another post.



On 11/2/06, Doug Way <dway at mailcan.com> wrote:
> 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
> fork.
> 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.
> - Doug
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20061102/379ef87c/attachment.htm

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list