Hi Andreas,

the latest KernelImage based on Squeak 3.10 is here:
http://comtalk.cz/public/pub/KernelImage/current/
I continuously compared the image to Squeak and commented the changes.
For more information see http://www.squeaksource.com/KernelImage.html.

The approach to PharoKernel is a little bit different. There is not a
current image that can be downloaded. Pharo is almost prepared for
this remodularization, it only needs to finish integration of this
issue:
http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=2635
For the description of its scope of the Kernel, the following issue is
important:
http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=2105

The goal of the KernelImage/PharoKernel is to have a modular system
with well defined packages a dependencies, not only the smallest
system. That was the reason why I always tried to keep the binding to
mainstream Squeak content.

There are several possible approaches:
- take the original KernelImage and adopt it for the latest Squeak. It
should be quite easy.
- do the similar remodularization and patches as the Pharo did. The
package structure of Pharo and Squeak then will be very similar.
- Pharo did a lot of important work on the cleanup of the system, it
has wider and motivated community of developers and its goals are
subset of goals of Squeak. What about to use whole Pharo as the basic
system for Squeak and let Pharo people to finish its modularization
and focus on tasks important for Squeak? Give me week or two and I
will show you that it's possible to load EToys and other Squeak
specific stuff to Pharo...

To Edgar: sorry, I do not have Skype.

Cheers,
-- Pavel


On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 9:53 PM, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi Pavel,
>
> Thanks for your offer! I've been talking to Juan about an approach that
> might give us at least a feel about the size of the effort we're talking
> about, namely to use the Cuis image and cluster all classes and methods into
> three categories:
> * Unchanged. Those classes and methods exist both in current Squeak trunk
> and Cuis.
> * Squeak-Only. Those classes and methods do only exist in Squeak.
> * Modified. Those classes and methods are different between Cuis and Squeak.
> The idea here is to get a feel for the size of the effort before it gets
> into the details (i.e., it would help us to understand whether the modified
> portions are 1% or 10% of the total size). Do you think the approach would
> be equally applicable to your Kernel images?
>
> Speaking of which, I'm not entirely sure what the scope or direction for
> these images is. Can you say a little bit about whether there's some
> underlying theme to this work (i.e., do you have actual use cases for these
> kernel images) or is it mostly just an attempt to make things smaller?
>
> Lastly, where can I find one of those kernel images these days? I'm
> interested in seeing how different or similar the structure is, in
> particular compared to Cuis.
>
> Cheers,
>  - Andreas
>
>
> On 8/22/2010 1:05 AM, Pavel Krivanek wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, Aug 21, 2010 at 5:34 AM, Andreas Raab<andreas.raab at gmx.de>  wrote:
>>>
>>> On 8/20/2010 7:30 AM, Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 8/20/10 9:04 AM, "Juan Vuletich"<juan at jvuletich.org>    wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Andreas and Juan would like to find a way to leverage the work done to
>>>>> reduce Cuis for Squeak. Ideally, Squeak would become a smaller kernel,
>>>>> about the size of Cui
>>>>
>>>> You have a kernel and this is the Pharo Kernel, mostly Pavel work.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure what exactly you're talking about, can you elaborate? Is
>>> there
>>> an image to look at and learn from? So far, I found Cuis to be the best
>>> alternative.
>>>
>>>> Why smart people like both you desire do all again ?
>>>
>>> Mostly because doing something like that requires help from the people
>>> who
>>> have done it before. I haven't seen a post from Pavel in two years; to me
>>> that is a clear expression of disinterest. Contrary to which Juan isn't
>>> only
>>> present, but he's also ran and be elected to the Squeak board and has
>>> repeatedly expressed his willingness to help. All other things being
>>> equal,
>>> that seems like a vast advantage, wouldn't you agree?
>>>
>>
>> Hi Andreas,
>>
>> I'm ready to help you.
>>
>> -- Pavel
>>
>>
>
>
>