On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 7:00 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote: > > > > On 14 Sep 2015, at 18:46, David T. Lewis <le...@mail.msen.com> wrote: > > > >> On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 8:25 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 14 Sep 2015, at 14:21, David T. Lewis <le...@mail.msen.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> No, OSProcess should not be included in the image. It is intended to be > >>>> an external package. > >>> > >>> mmm… we want to include it as more and more people requires it and we > >>> can profit from having it in the image (same as FFI). > >>> why do you think it should be external? > >> > >> We should distinguish between having it traditionally-in-Image where > >> that is the only place it exists and fixes are integrated, and the > >> current trend (e.g. in-Image Glamorous Tools) where fixes are > >> integrated "upstream" into an external package > >> > > > > Yes, that is what I meant. > > > > Dave > > Several packages are in that situation: Zinc, STON, FUEL, ... it works quite > well.
In fact, Fuel was integrated in the "traditionally-in-Image" style, but at some point we could switch to the new trend. Martín
