[squeak-dev] Re: Ubuntu package maintainers help
Bert Freudenberg
bert at freudenbergs.de
Thu Apr 23 20:34:07 UTC 2009
On 23.04.2009, at 20:50, Jerome Peace wrote:
>>> How does the squeak-plugin image differ from the other
>> squeak images?
>>> Can any squeak image be nominated for plugin duty or
>> is there
>>> something that the image has to know how to handle?
>>
>> I view it as some sort of standards to which people can
>> rely to when
>> they embed Squeak projects (*.pr files) into web-pages via
>> <EMBED>...</EMBED> tags. Obviously, no project
>> works in any image.
>> Projects that are supposed to work with Squeak plugin has
>> to be tested
>> with a specific image and squeak-plugin-image is that
>> image.
>>
> Umm. Ok. So the web-plugin image has a sort of contract with the .pr
> files that want to be run in it.
>
> Is there any reason why we wish a squeak image for a web-plugin?
> Rather than an Etoys-image for the web-plugin. I ask this because
> Squeakland seems to me to be the only one right now persuing this.
> AFAIK they have cornered the market.
>
> I seriously doubt the either the 3.9/3.10 branch wants to pursue
> maintaining this.
> Ditto for the Pharo branch.
>
> Bert: Any insight into this point?
>
>> In theory, any image could be used with squeak-plugin but
>> it would
>> create a chaos. Creators of projects would not know to what
>> properties
>> of the image they can rely.
>>
Right. The only line of images caring for project compatibility is the
Squeakland Etoys version.
It would make the most sense to use Etoys as browser plugin image.
- Bert -
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|