2006/3/3, Daniel Vainsencher danielv@techunix.technion.ac.il:
A. More ties with sibling communities:
- news about their progress,
- guides and up to date pointers to their releases (see the recent
"which Squeakland should I use for..." discussion) and so forth.
- More visibility for the processes of code synchronization between us
and them (some way people can quickly answer the question - what are we missing compared to <your favorite variant of squeak).
- More cross project "platform" discussion, to share opinions (and maybe
even coordinate policy) about various changes to Squeak as a platform. Examples: adoption of ToolBuilder, Traits, OB vs traditional browser, annotations, Flow... B. Action on the license front - a decision on a license policy. Since we're on the "what I'd like to see" - I think we should try to lower the percent of non-freely licensed code in the image:
- request that new packages be at least dual licensed MIT,
- Find out some conservative approximation of "who holds what
copyrights", and relicense to MIT anything we can get consent for.
- Encourage people that are changing packages significantly (refactoring
collections to use traits) to rewrite instead, and place it under a free license.
- have SqueakSource repositories have a "if you upload code here, by
default it is under license ..." field per project, to make .
Implemented. Waiting for review and deployment if accepted.
Philippe
C. Continue improving Squeak governance - we now have an elected board, which is better than the previous modes of selection. However, the relation of this board to various aspects of Squeak is unclear:
- Who decides whether to push <your favorite disruptive change> into the
current version?
- Relation to non-package-maintaining teams: who decides membership and
scope of a team? The important thing here is that we evolve/design the structure, so that it improves over time, rather than the sometimes arbitrary-seeming changes we've had in the past.
Daniel
stéphane ducasse wrote:
Hi
I'm reposting this email since I have the impression that the point was lost in its original thread.
... - Normally after election, politicians do not really listen anymore and I would like to do the inverse. I would really like to know what you expect or would like to see put in place. We have some ideas (bounty system, better process) and I will really listen what the new boarders want to do (I'm even eager to see that :)).
We do not have the monopole of good ideas, so if you have some points that you would like to see happening please mention it.
Stef