WebClient-Core port to Pharo 1.1 final

I agree with Andreas that the process for including packages in Pharo
is not transparent (at least not me). Dont know the process
for Squeak either - but at least we all should take care to keep the
whole platform and forks open. Maybe the license should be a
required field in Squeaksource for any new project.

Havent followed the whole thread - but I still wonder what the reason
for Andreas is to not release Webclient as MIT? Especially since I think
it could be a nice addition to the standard images (Squeak, Pharo or
whatever) ...

Bye
T.


--
GMX DSL SOMMER-SPECIAL: Surf & Phone Flat 16.000 für nur 19,99 ¿/mtl.!*
http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/dsl

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

On Aug 30, 2010, at 10:27 AM, Torsten Bergmann wrote:

> I agree with Andreas that the process for including packages in Pharo
> is not transparent (at least not me).

read the open and transparent discussions that happened over the past months in this mailing-list: check for webClient in the title :)
For pharo: this is really simple
        - we discuss in the mailing-list
        - reach a consensus
        - act.

Tell me once you will have read the mails if this is not what we did and how we could improve them.
I would like to have the same process than python but we are too small for that right now.


_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project