I think my suggestion would be more palatable to folks concerned about tidiness: - Strip Installer of all features that can be handled by Gofer. - Make Installer USE Gofer for those things that Gofer does (Monticello packages). - That way folks like Miguel can have only Gofer loaded, old fogies like me can have Installer+Gofer loaded. One question that came to my mind last night: What does > 1000 lines of Gofer code bring to Monticello-loading that I can't already do with just Monticello? or with a couple of facade methods added to plain MC? 2010/12/15 Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@eranova.si>:
Hi guys,
Cross posted to Squeak and Pharo.
On 14. 12. 2010 22:56, Ken G. Brown wrote:
Lukas maintains Gofer and there are reasons to use it: closer relationship with Pharo, contemporary MC integration (Metacello).
I can accept using Gofer in trunk, for things that require it like reading it's own scripts. But I don't want to see Installer go away... because of all the things Installer does that Gofer doesn't.
What if someone:
 1. adds to Gofer loading from SqueakMap and other  2. then Lukas is kindly asked to rename it to the Installer.
That way we will have a maintained installer with a meaningful name and everyone will be happy. Because we really need one and only one installer for both Squeak and Pharo.
Best regards Janko
-- Janko Mivšek AIDA/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si