>

Was there a reason you opted not to include RB spelling? I don't know how
may people use it- I find it really handy, so my vote would be for
inclusion.
...Stan


Good question. I really appreacite the feedback. Thanks.

No, actually the only reason is because I didn realize it :)� because, I don't explicity load RB, it is loaded because as a dependency of OB-refactory, but it only needs the Refactoring-Core, not spelling, and that's why it wasen't loaded.

However, it is really easy to change if we want. I just put the complete RB as requiered in in Pharo and that's all.

In summary, no problem, if we want, I add it.

I don't think even it is much problem to load it. And in the previous images it is was loaded, so, I like to idea to load it.

What other things?

cheers

mariano
--
View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/BetaTesting-ANN-Pharo1-0-10505-rc1dev10-01-1-tp4278312p4288038.html
Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________