2007/8/15, Igor Stasenko <siguctua at gmail.com>:
> Since its not a fork, and obviously not a spoon, and not mainstream,
> then what short term can be used to identify it?


A distribution is perfect to me. Is really like a Linux distribution.


> Joking..  :)
>
> On 15/08/07, Damien Cassou <damien.cassou at gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2007/8/15, Göran Krampe <goran at krampe.se>:
> > > > I've heard many times that squeak-dev is yet another fork of Squeak.
> > > > It's NOT the case from my point of view because:
> > > >
> > > > - squeak-dev is built on top of the last squeak release and beta versions
> > > > - there is not a single patch applied in squeak-dev
> > > > - it's only an aggregation of already existing packages that anyone
> > > > can load in his base image
> > >
> > > I actually meant squeak.org when I wrote Squeak-dev. I was referring to
> > > the image maintained by the developers typically hanging on the squeak-dev
> > > mailinglist - and not your image which is called Squeak-Dev.  Sorry for
> > > the bad choice of words. :)
> > >
> > > So I haven't viewed your image as a fork, at least not yet. ;)
> >
> > Ok :-). But I heard it already that's why I wrote this mail. I hope
> > things are clearer now.
> >
> > --
> > Damien Cassou
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Best regards,
> Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
>
>
>
>


-- 
Damien Cassou