[Etoys] First use of OLPC feedback (bugs, suggestions, questions)
karl.ramberg at comhem.se
Wed Nov 14 14:52:52 EST 2007
stephane ducasse wrote:
>> It wasn't like that at all, Stef. One of the biggest reasons why we
>> ended up with a 3.8-based image was because the old Squeakland image
>> was based on 3.8. In the other words, we didn't pick mainstream 3.8
>> image over 3.9. We picked the Squeakland image as the basis.
>> And why? Because .pr files created in the Squeakland image are not
>> compatible with the 3.9 image. The class shape change introduced by
>> Traits; you cannot load them into 3.9-based image. That was a big
> Ok I understand. I do not remember if this is really the shape
> changes that
> break projects I will ask marcus.
>> We, the whole Squeak community, weren't too careful about the
>> implication of Traits and existing contents when Traits was being
>> integrated to the mainstream image. This was really unfortunate, but
>> we couldn't simply ignore the existing contents.
>> And, to be honest, having a real control on the entire system was
>> important as development has to be done quickly. Just sticking with
>> an image we understand was another motivation. (At the risk of losing
>> the "improvements after 3.9, that is true.)
> Yes but now we lose mutual benefit.
>> And, like Bert wrote (quoted below), the primary concern is always
>> to provide a better Etoys experience.
> I was also thinking about older kids :)
> Thanks for answering because this is the kind of answer I can understand
> I still hope to find some times to harvest the changes made in olpc
> for squeak 3.11 or after
*Pavel* Krivanek maintains packages where Morphic and Etoys are
separated. I'm not sure of the status of those,I guess the etoy version
is quite old. But it could be a starting point.
More information about the Etoys