[squeak-dev] Re: SqueakMap is a "Showroom"

Janko Mivšek janko.mivsek at eranova.si
Fri Jun 27 22:20:40 UTC 2008

Chris Muller wrote:
> Put another way, if we use SqueakMap solely as a tool for consumption
> of software, and Monticello for production (and consumption) of
> software, improve the bridge between the two (publishing) and we're
> basically Done..!  Seriously, what else is missing?

I agree, this can be a easily achievable base for evolving further.

I have quite some time in mind to start with a first step: a SqueakMap 
web "uplift", that is, a reimplementation of map.squeak.org to be more 
user friendly but also more fresh looking and modern.

We can then make the next step in that evolution: adding a good 
dependency support, with merging Universes approach or somehow 
different. If we merge that part of Universes which seems to work really 
well, we did a first unification: between SM and Universes. End user 
will now be happy, installation will be as simple as possible: one click.

Next step is better and as user friendly as possible integration with 
Monticello as in-image tool for package and version control. This would 
be preferable for publishers.

Another step would be adding/merging Sake/Packages and LPF, at least as 
I understand Keith's work.

Evolution and unification of existing tools, that's my proposal, not 
revolution and doing everything from scratch again and again. Well, for 
experimental purposes revolutionary approaches are welcome, but as we 
can see, those projects loose breath somewhere in the middle. But we can 
incorporate ideas from that experiments in our evolutionary tools. 
That's how I see things.


Janko Mivšek
Smalltalk Web Application Server

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list