[squeak-dev] Adding WebClient and SqueakSSL to Trunk?

Levente Uzonyi leves at elte.hu
Tue Apr 21 09:47:17 UTC 2015


There's update-topa.307, which contains these packages.

Levente

On Tue, 21 Apr 2015, karl ramberg wrote:

> Great.Seems we need to issue a update map before these gets pulled in by updating.
> 
> Can also remove Universes package ? 
> That also needs to be done in a update map, I think
> 
> Karl
> 
> On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 10:54 PM, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
>       Hi,
>
>       On 14.04.2015, at 14:18, karl ramberg <karlramberg at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>       > We should pull these in to trunk as soon as possible so we can get stuff tested before the release of a new image.
>       >
>       > Can you do that Levente, as you seem most familiar with the changes you made ?
>       >
>
>       Although I am not levente I went ahead and pushed SqueakSSL and WebClient into
>       the trunk. Lets see how it turns out.
>
>       Best
>               -Tobias
>
>       > Karl
>       >
>       > On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 9:22 PM, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
>       > Hi Levente
>       >
>       > On 06.04.2015, at 20:43, Levente Uzonyi <leves at elte.hu> wrote:
>       >
>       > > It would be better for these packages too, because they would get more
>       > > attention.
>       > > The SqueakSSL/WebClient changes I made in October[1] are still missing from the official repositories.
>       > >
>       > > Levente
>       > >
>       > > [1] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2014-October/180251.html
>       > >
>       >
>       > I just now saw that there is more than just vm stuff.
>       >
>       > The problem with WebClient and SqueakSSL as of now is, that
>       > its maintenance-ship is, well, complicated. I went forth and
>       > pushed tiny changes to WebClient by just being somewhat on
>       > my own initiative[1].
>       >
>       > ===========
>       >
>       > Dear Squeak Community as a whole and dear Ron as person possibly
>       > best fit to make a decision on this:
>       >
>       >         Should we put the maintainer-ship of WebClient and
>       >         SqueakSSL into the hands of the Squeak Core Team?
>       >
>       >
>       > ===========
>       >
>       > Best
>       >         -Tobias
>       >
>       >
>       >
>       >
>       > [1]: There's a saying, initiative is discipline-lessness with positive outcome
>       >
>       > > On Mon, 6 Apr 2015, Tobias Pape wrote:
>       > >
>       > >>
>       > >> On 06.04.2015, at 18:59, David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
>       > >>
>       > >>>> On Sun, Apr 5, 2015 at 10:26 AM, Marcel Taeumel
>       > >>>> <marcel.taeumel at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de> wrote:
>       > >>>>> Hey! :)
>       > >>>>>
>       > >>>>> Can we add both to the update map (somehow?) and see if it works out
>       > >>>>> during
>       > >>>>> the following days/weeks until the release?
>       > >>>>
>       > >>>> +1
>       > >>>>
>       > >>>
>       > >>> What is the point of moving these into the base image? Aren't these
>       > >>> exactly the kinds of things that you would want to have maintained as
>       > >>> independent packages that can be easily loaded from SqueakMap?
>       > >>
>       > >> I think both these are Extremely Important (capital).
>       > >> WebClient as replacement for HTTPSocket (it already provides a compatibility
>       > >> layer; Andreas seemed to always considered WebClient to replace HTTPSocket),
>       > >> and SqueakSSL because you can't load anything meaningful on the web without
>       > >> SSL; github, twitter, most sites. And that's good.
>       > >> Plus we _finally_ could put the Plain Text Passwords for Monticello behind
>       > >> SSL…
>       > >>
>       > >> Best
>       > >>      -Tobias
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list