+1
And continuously work towards starting smaller by taking more and more out. 

Ken,
from my iPhone

On 2013-01-25, at 11:48, "H. Hirzel" <hannes.hirzel at gmail.com> wrote:

> This leads us to the discussion of building different 'distributions'
> or releases which we had many times in the past.
> 
> This time the situation is substantially different as we now have a
> continuous integration server which allows to do this.
> 
> So this might be a good opportunity to start building another
> distribution/release with what Frank proposes. So besides the current
> one at http://www.squeakci.org/job/ReleaseSqueakTrunk/ we would have a
> "developer's release' with additional packages....
> 
> --Hannes
> 
> 
> On 1/25/13, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 25 January 2013 18:34, Ken G. Brown <kbrown at mac.com> wrote:
>>> My two cents is that the profiler should be an external package that is
>>> brought into a minimal core at build time if desired. Now us the time to
>>> start doing that sort of thing otherwise it will be stuck in the base
>>> image
>>> and no one will know how to get it out.. The other packages as well of
>>> course, whether at build time for a release or as a later customization
>>> for
>>> individual users.
>> 
>> Well, it is already an external package. The argument would be "it
>> can't get entangled with the base image if it stays that way". Which
>> is fair enough.
>> 
>> It _is_ a critical dev tool, and (a) devs can load it into their own
>> custom images and (b) we have a release script that can take the clean
>> fully updated image from CI and load it in as part of the
>> ReleaseSqueakTrunk job. Installer _might_ need a bit of love to do
>> this; I don't recall off-hand.
>> 
>> frank
>> 
>>> Ken,
>>> from my iPhone
>>> 
>>> On 2013-01-25, at 11:22, Jeff Gonis <jeff.gonis at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> My quick two cents is that I agree wholeheartedly with Chris.  There is
>>> tons
>>> of stuff in Morphic like Nebraska, Etoys and things like MVC and
>>> Universes
>>> that could be made Squeakmap packages before something like the profiler.
>>> These would also seem to give a far greater savings in terms of class
>>> count
>>> and LOC, than the comparatively small profiler.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Ahem.  Perhaps before we start slashing and cutting basic tools like
>>>> the profiler, we should articulate a coherent description of our
>>>> vision for a reduced image, what's in it, and what audience it would
>>>> target.
>>>> 
>>>> The profiler is an essential development tool, so that would seem to
>>>> cut developers from the target audience.  Whatever reason you want to
>>>> cut it may be that you'd also like to cut the Process browser too -- I
>>>> don't know without knowing what your goals are.  Like everyone else I
>>>> want a smaller image, but with "small" it should be more like a
>>>> neutron star is to a red-giant -- *dense* with functionality and
>>>> applicability.  Until we can get to a truly "minimal" image (1MB) our
>>>> cutting should be toward the goal of something Small and powerful, not
>>>> small and useless.  :)
>>>> 
>>>> I suggest before we cut basic development tools we cut "app" type
>>>> stuff like... "telemorphic" and
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Thu, Jan 24, 2013 at 12:04 PM, tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On 24-01-2013, at 8:08 AM, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Chris, might I lean on you a bit to add a SqueakMap entry for the
>>>>>>> profiler?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Is this not something we should just put straight into the base
>>>>>> image?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> I'd say no; and the existing one ought to be removed as well. Cut,
>>>>> slash, trim.
>>>>> 
>>>>> tim
>>>>> --
>>>>> tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
>>>>> "How many Kzin does it take to change a lightbulb?" "None. You can
>>>>> scream and leap in the dark."
>