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 . 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