deprecate Universes?

Frankly, who is using Universes and is there really an interest in
keeping that stuff in a trunk image?
Wouldn't it be a good candidate for optional download?
I bet it would be far more usefull to have Gofer or Metacello
nowadays, and a simple Installer stance for loading them is OK, so I
don't much understand this favour we make to Universes...

Nicolas

+1

On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Nicolas Cellier
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> Frankly, who is using Universes and is there really an interest in
> keeping that stuff in a trunk image?
> Wouldn't it be a good candidate for optional download?
> I bet it would be far more usefull to have Gofer or Metacello
> nowadays, and a simple Installer stance for loading them is OK, so I
> don't much understand this favour we make to Universes...
>
> Nicolas
>

On 6/4/12 7:56 PM, "Chris Muller" <[hidden email]> wrote:


I come begging for this for years..
Now if we move on and get rid of all and adopt Gofer as only way of loading
code....

Edgar

+1

On 6/5/12, Chris Muller <[hidden email]> wrote:
> +1

On Mon, 4 Jun 2012, Nicolas Cellier wrote:

> Frankly, who is using Universes and is there really an interest in
> keeping that stuff in a trunk image?
> Wouldn't it be a good candidate for optional download?
> I bet it would be far more usefull to have Gofer or Metacello
> nowadays, and a simple Installer stance for loading them is OK, so I
> don't much understand this favour we make to Universes...

Good idea, please extract/remove it.


Levente

>
> Nicolas
>
>

2012/6/5 Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]>:
So removing from the configuration map is easy, but...
Do we have to increase the global version number? (can't remember
where it is defined)
Then what do we do of the trunk branch mcz? it slightly diverged from
squeaksource...
Maybe it would be good to move mcz back in squeak source with a
different name specifying .squeaktrunk. branch?

Nicolas

>>
>> Nicolas
>>
>>
>

On 2012-06-05, at 12:36, Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:

> On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 3:36 PM, Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Frankly, who is using Universes and is there really an interest in
>> keeping that stuff in a trunk image?
>> Wouldn't it be a good candidate for optional download?
>> I bet it would be far more usefull to have Gofer or Metacello
>> nowadays, and a simple Installer stance for loading them is OK, so I
>> don't much understand this favour we make to Universes...

+1

> Now if we move on and get rid of all and adopt Gofer as only way of loading
> code....


-1


- Bert -

El 6/9/12 7:44 AM, "Bert Freudenberg" <[hidden email]> escribió:

>> Now if we move on and get rid of all and adopt Gofer as only way of loading
>> code....
>
>
> -1
>
>
> - Bert -


The pharopata cousins could afford waste valious time trying to do two semi
incompatible things to same time.

Do you think we Squeakers have the time for being different ?
How many use Installer and how many Gofer ?

Right now I updating
http://ftp.squeak.org/4.3alpha/SqueakCore4.3alpha-11722.zip.

Can I upload to ftp?
Somebody care about having a modular Squeak?

Edgar

On 6/9/12, Edgar De Cleene <[hidden email]> wrote:
I do not understand.
What do you mean by this?

version 4.3 has been released and there is now 4.4alpha
ftp://ftp.squeak.org/4.4alpha/

--Hannes

>
> Can I upload to ftp?
> Somebody care about having a modular Squeak?
>
> Edgar
>
>
>
>

On 6/9/12 12:14 PM, "H. Hirzel" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> version 4.3 has been released and there is now 4.4alpha
An not SqueakCore, right?
And we should know if taking the last one we could update to last code,
right ?

And Squeak 4.4 do not run in older hardware, right?

But don't worry , I do not put any .image if people do not like

Edgar

OK, I understand now

http://ftp.squeak.org/4.3alpha/SqueakCore4.3alpha-11722.zip.

Means a Squeak Core image in alpha stage based on the Squeak 4.3 release.

Right?

What did you do to the Squeak 4.3 release to get there?

-- Hannes



On 6/9/12, Edgar J. De Cleene <[hidden email]> wrote: