Andreas Raab wrote:
How can we bring things in the "main distribution" then? As far as I understand the problem is not that of "being in the main distribution" but rather of "letting people know that this particular application exists". How many people out there _do_ actually know the contents of the app/goodies directory at the ftp servers?
Letting people know that the application is only a (ftp-)fingertip away, however, is a completely different issue. I could think of a scheme of "remotely loadable applications" in which the actual image only contains the names and the (ftp or http) locations of these apps. Then, while in the image you can have a look at these apps. If you want to try one, you just click on "download" and the app is being fetched from the next ftp server around the corner. Or it can fetch a description first, or tell you what other apps are required first if it has been tested with your current image/vm version or whatever.
Ok, now back to the coordination issue. Given that we would use this sort of remotely loadable apps, all we need for coordination is actually dropping a note to Squeak Central saying: "Well here is this app called MyGreatSqueakApplication and its on ftp://ftp.nowhere.domain/pub/myApp" This doesn't sound like big deal to neither the author or Squeak Central and could probably easily managed.
Good analysis! I like your idea of filing in applications directly from an FTP or HTTP server at the click of a button. However, I'd suggest using the Squeak Wiki to advertise applications and their URL's rather than Squeak Central. That way, application information can be updated by the application maintainer directly as often as necessary. If this information were maintained in the image by Squeak Central (say in the System Workspace or a similar window), then it would only be updated once per release cycle.
To support this mode of use, I've created a new area on the Squeak Wiki (http://c2.com:8080) entitled "SqueakApplications", and added an example entry for Georg's Web Server. (Georg, I hope you don't mind. Feel free to edit it!)
I also added a page entitled "ApplicationedWanted", similar to the PortWishList page. This may help coordinate sets of people interested in porting some application (such as T-Gen) to Squeak.
Wiki's are easy, wiki's are slick, Check out the Squeak wiki, It really is quick!
-- John
Maloney wrote:
Good analysis! I like your idea of filing in applications directly from an FTP or HTTP server at the click of a button. However, I'd suggest using the Squeak Wiki to advertise applications and their URL's rather than Squeak Central. That way, application information can be updated by the application maintainer directly as often as necessary. If this information were maintained in the image by Squeak Central (say in the System Workspace or a similar window),
This discussion reminds me of one idea I had some time ago. I thought we needed a more flexible source code management scheme. A method source or a class comment containing hypertext links is indeed an important revolution, but why should we have the restriction that only text in .sources and .changes is directly referenceable from the image? This builds some wall in the middle of the documentation. I.e., imagine one downloaded the image&source and is happy with the documentation in the source, and wonders what those *.sqdoc files on the ftp server are. After some time he or she clicks on a link to a piece which is in this *.sqdoc and now the more tough question arises, what's the real difference. Well, I wrote a lot of technical documentation and I would hate if I were forced to structure my texts accordingly to some exrernal condition and not to the structure of my thought.
But after thinking on it some time I came to the conclusion I don't know how to fight against this. All ideas I could think of led to even worse complications :-///
Boris
To support this mode of use, I've created a new area on the Squeak Wiki (http://c2.com:8080) entitled "SqueakApplications", and added an example entry for Georg's Web Server. (Georg, I hope you don't mind. Feel free to edit it!)
I also added a page entitled "ApplicationedWanted", similar to the PortWishList page. This may help coordinate sets of people interested in porting some application (such as T-Gen) to Squeak.
Do we need a third category -- parts/pieces, not complete applications? Or do we want to just collapse these into applications? I'm thinking what of my work to post there. Swiki and a ClassroomTools package we're working on are clearly applications, but FileDictionary and CachedSwiki are pieces to other applications. Similarly, the nifty Exceptions mechanism that got posted recently looks like a piece to contribute to an application. Shall we just lump them all together in the SqueakApplications page?
Mark
-------------------------- Mark Guzdial : Georgia Tech : College of Computing : Atlanta, GA 30332-0280 (404) 894-5618 : Fax (404) 894-0673 : guzdial@cc.gatech.edu http://www.cc.gatech.edu/gvu/people/Faculty/Mark.Guzdial.html
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Boris G. Chr. Shingarov -
Maloney -
Mark Guzdial