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

Frank Shearar frank.shearar at gmail.com
Tue Apr 21 11:46:07 UTC 2015


On 21 April 2015 at 10:39, karl ramberg <karlramberg at gmail.com> 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

I _think_ that back during the 4.4 release cycle we reached consensus
that Universes would last one more cycle. That would means its removal
time is now.

Don't forget that we need to bump the VersionNumber package version
when this happens (or our "version number" will decrease).

frank

> 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