[etoys-dev] How to get a nice EToys based development environment?
bert at freudenbergs.de
Wed Sep 30 06:49:59 EDT 2009
On 30.09.2009, at 09:09, Andreas Raab wrote:
> Simon Guest wrote:
>> Am I unusual in wanting to do this? Is there a better thing to do?
> No you're not. I'd like to do the same. Unfortunately the Etoys
> image is so far behind at this point that it has become a serious
> hindrance for me. No Monticello, Shout, ToolBuilder, Closures etc.
> You name it. OTOH, Etoys has all the media activities that are
> broken in Squeak.
> Here is a VHLQ (very high-level question): How do people feel about
> bringing Squeak.org and Etoys together again? Since the Etoys-haters
> left, there is both room as well as a need for a driving
> application. A merger with Etoys would give Squeak back its primary
> purpose for existence, would allow the Etoys community to benefit
> from improvements made at Squeak.org and allow of us to focus our
> efforts in trying to provide a unified artifact for personal dynamic
> media. We have an open development process that I think could work
> for such a project so that at the end of the day the Squeakland
> release may come with a special "skin" for the UI but where the
> basic system is a Squeak.org image right out of the box.
> I'm not sure if we have the resources to do this quickly but I'd
> like at least to raise the question to see how people feel about it.
> Is this even option?
IMHO (and as I said previously) it is the *only* option for sustained
development of Etoys.
So, in a word, yes. Not trivial by any measure but necessary in one
way or the other.
There was even a coarse plan for how to do it, but I'm not sure if we
ever wrote it up. Something along the lines of document the current
UI / behavior (what we consider officially supported in Etoys), and
when the "new thing" meets the spec, switch over.
Good news is that work on the documentation part is already starting
- Bert -
Begin forwarded message:
> From: Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de>
> Date: 3. September 2009 13:38:12 MESZ
> To: etoys dev <etoys-dev at squeakland.org>, "squeakland.org mailing
> list" <squeakland at squeakland.org>
> Subject: [etoys-dev] Re: Etoys documentation TOC
> On 03.09.2009, at 13:23, Timothy Falconer wrote:
>> On Sep 3, 2009, at 7:01 AM, Rita Freudenberg wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> as you all know we don't really have an Etoys documentation. So
>>> let's start writing it. As I wrote earlier I propose to use FLOSS
>>> Manuals. It is used by the olpc and sugar community for writing
>>> manuals and books. To get started we should have a TOC outline.
>>> Here are my suggestions:
>>> 1. Introduction (short description what etoys is about)
>>> 2. Getting started (technical description on how to install and
>>> start etoys on different operating systems)
>>> 3. User Interface (painting tools, halo, viewer ...)
>>> 4. Tiles (describing every available tile)
>>> 5. Objects (everything from the supplies bin and object catalogue,
>>> What am I missing? Of course we can have subchapters and also
>>> later add main chapters if we find out we need it. Here is the
>>> manual for TurtleArt so you can get the idea what our
>>> documentation could look like:
>>> What do you think? If we come up with a TOC outline I can send it
>>> to Anne Gentle from FLOSS manuals to set it up and we can start
>> It's a good list. So this would be more of a reference manual than
>> a getting started guide? (with tutorials)
> IMHO that would be much harder to write than a reference manual.
> It's still desperately needed of course but we should start simple.
> The reference manual also serves another purpose: it defines the
> boundary of what we consider officially supported, and what not. As
> you know there is much more in Etoys than is easily accessible on
> the surface. If it's documented, we try hard support it. If not, you
> may still use it but can't rely on to work in future versions.
> - Bert -
More information about the etoys-dev