Stéphane Rollandin wrote:
>
>>> To be honest I never had been an etoys user and probably should not 
>>> jump in here. But anyway I wonder: if etoys are already working just 
>>> fine right now (in efficiently forked image) why do they can not be 
>>> detangled from the current squeak-dev image to allow it move forward?
>>>
>>
>> I don't know, I did not implement eToys. I just use it, happily.
>>
On the other side I'm extremely unhappy with current state of morphic. 
Today I have recommended the friend who is willing to study smalltalk to 
use Dolphin at the first time. This is because I believe that learning 
of Smalltalk should happen in the cleanly written system and Squeak 
doesn't qualify for this (because of morphic in a large extent). It is 
not system that one programmer can understand with reasonable effort 
anymore. Dolphin is.
> sorry, I think I missed your point. you meant "if eToys work currently 
> well in Squeakland, why not get rid of them in Squeak-dev" ?. in that 
> case my answer is quite simple: I work in Squeak-dev, not Squeakland.
>
I see. So no point to argue who is right. The question is - what should 
we do in this clear conflict of interests? I would prefer an 
experimental marginal fork to exist for people who are ready for 
destabilization of things. Individual work like what Juan does is not 
quite the same because people tend to burn out and efforts should be 
joined. At least several people with a common view on this are needed.

regards
    Danil