Hi Klaus!

"Klaus D. Witzel" <klaus.witzel at cobss.com> wrote:
> Hi Göran,
> 
> on Wed, 25 Oct 2006 14:49:09 +0200, you wrote:
> > Hi!
> >
> > Ok, let's back up a bit. If I got it right it is all about deciding on
> > one of these three ways forward:
> ...
> >
> > 3. Make eToys reloadable (and throw it out), of course, this is the
> > "best" route. But who will do it? And if noone steps up to do it, is it
> > okay to pick #2 above instead of #1?
> ...
> > PS. If I am not mistaken Pavel's code does not make eToys reloadable
> > with Morphic still being in the image, right? I presume Morphic and
> > eToys are intertwined. If I am wrong, then hey - that means #3 is
> > already done and we can all just go for it.
> 
> Well, *this* part of the debate made me "tout" the "conspiracy" question  
> in this thread :|
> 
> Did you read Pavel's response to this thread. What he says there is, by  
> the time of this writing, (computer-) ages long known to the community:  
> removable and reloadable Etoys, etc, IN THE ACTUAL 3.9 IMAGE (excuse me  
> for the emphasis).
> 
> So, how come you still question it? What is it that I don't understand,  
> what exactly are the unknown requirements (and who does require)?

As I know that you now understand my question better (having read the
rest of the thread) I still must ask, why the heat? And what
"conspiracy" are you talking about?

Curious.

regards, Göran

PS. And as for the flaps that you wonder why I want to keep - many
Squeakers use the flaps in various ways. Some probably use the Tools
flap for example, I have also seen people embed a Workspace in a flap in
order to have it handily available. In short - they are useful for other
things than making eToys.