+1
On May 7, 2013, at 7:59 PM, Camillo Bruni <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2013-05-07, at 19:03, Andrei Vasile Chis <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Given that SmalltalkHub is now stable we were considering to discontinue >> SqueakSource. >> Our idea is to provide a grace period of a couple of months to allow the >> current active users to migrate their projects to the new service and then >> simply put squeaksource in read-only mode (simply exposing the directory >> structure and allowing downloads). >> >> What do you think about it ? >> Are there any good reasons to still keep SqueakSource alive? > > I don't really think so. Read-only mode is perfect, you only waste time to > relaunch squeaksource when it crashes :) > >
