Em 28-06-2009 15:10, Ian Trudel escreveu:

(...)

I generally do not agree with those that think "corporate support" or "paid
work" is the solution. Sorry, I just don't.

I don't want a company deciding what happens with Squeak. Definitely not.


Göran, I do understand your concern about this. We should remember
that there is no ultimate solution. I think his idea was rather about
integrating this as part of a solution. Nothing to do with "a company
deciding on Squeak". Furthermore, ignoring companies and commercial
activities is also not a solution at all.

There is a huge difference between offering support to companies (and
asking support from them) and having them running Squeak Oversight
Board. I think we all agree the latter is undesirable and should not
happen.

Ian.

I would like to add that currently much of Linux development has corporate support. Without that linux would be dead or would be in the same instance as, let's say, FreeBSD. That doesn't mean that corporations are telling which direction linux must follow. Linux is only the most obvious example.

But I don't like to look at Squeak only as a toy platform that some MSc and PhD students can use to develop their works. I guess that people who's supporting their packages since old releases will agree with me. Besides, most people in the smalltalk communities ask the question: why Java did it while smalltalk didn't? And the answers are all around: Java had documentation from day 0. Java was really cross platform from day 0. Java was highly standardized. Java didn't oversaw day to day requirements as internationalization and comprehensive file and network support... And now the list of languages that are doing while smalltalk is spinning around is growing with Python, Ruby and other languages/environments. And I feel dismay when I see that even traditional smalltalk distributions (like Cincom VW) are loosing spin.

In short: money is not a bad thing. It allows development. Even when we are in academic environments money help to justify research and development projects. Want another example? SWI-Prolog.

But lack of money can be a problem. How many bright smalltalk researchers cannot work as much as they need/want to because they're involved in all sort of "more important, more immediate" projects? How many people left smalltalk development (not only squeak) to work in "more profitable areas"? Even people as Mr. Ungar and Mr. Kay and others had to stop/reduce participating strongly in Squeak committee due to other professional duties. That signs that for their current employers Squeak is not important enough to justify time employed in deciding its present and future.

When I was younger, working at university, I had this prejudice against money and "corporate support" and believed strongly in the obligation of State to financially support projects that would never ever pay themselves. That the "market" was controlled by a bunch of unlettered execs refractory to changes. Life proved that this prejudice didn't make me any good.

CdAB