2009/7/1 Ramon Leon <ramon.leon at allresnet.com>:
>>> Mind you, I never implied that work should stop to improve Squeak in the
>>> here-and-now (go back and read what I wrote). But for me every
>>> improvement
>>> fits into a larger context.
>>>
>>
>> I never implied that we should drop supporting an educational software
>> for squeak (eToys & friends).
>> Just tell me: who is currently maintains eToys in Squeak 3.10.2?
>> If there's no-one, then wouldn't it be better to cut it out and
>> integrate later as a separate module/package (whatever you think is
>> fits for it) by people who cares?
>> When i come to shop to buy a bread & taking it to the cash desk, is
>> there anyone yelling at me, that i'm also need to pay for a bicycle,
>> because bread is not selling as a separate product?
>>
>> Please understand me, i have nothing against eToys. But i treat eToys
>> as an application on Squeak platform, not as a core part of it. And i
>> thinking that it should play under a common rules as any other
>> applications do: keep it as separate package.
>
> Ditto, why is so hard for some to see that eToys isn't Squeak, it's an app
> build on Squeak?  If eToys was a loadable/unloadable application, no one
> would have any problem with it whatsoever.
>

A few more words to support that:
Isn't the part of Seaside success was that it is developed as a
standalone application?
Think, how hard it would be to port it on a different platform, if its
was tightly integrated into particular Squeak image.
And does it (being standalone) makes Seaside a less
great/useful/usable thing than eToys because of that?

Please note, i don't belong to Seaside camp and not trying to evangelize.
My interest in Seaside is almost equal to interest in eToys.
My true range of interests lying somewhere else :)

>>> For example, the Etoys team started 2 years ago to develop a product
>>> that got shipped to 500 thousand users by now, soon it will be a million.
>>> They did that with only a handful of developers working part-time.
>>> Sticking
>>> to the base system version they started out with was the only option (as
>>> everybody who ever did serious product development can relate to). Now
>>> that
>>> the hot development phase is over, the changes can be folded back into
>>> Squeak proper.
>
> It doesn't need to be in Squeak at all, any version.  What it needs is to be
> able to be loaded into Squeak like any other application.  There's just no
> justification for it being in the core image; none.
>
>> We can live under the same roof. And i'm all for it. Just don't turn
>> every room in this house to be a child room.
>> We need a room for guests, rest room, a working room, a garage room,
>> and of course - a child room.
>
> +10.
>
> Ramon Leon
> http://onsmalltalk.com
>
>



-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.