Paul Fernhout wrote:
> 
> Doug Way wrote:
> > Would a good next step be to set up a mailing list to help
> > get all interested parties involved?
> > I suppose the foundation could just be discussed on this list,
> > but that might be somewhat disruptive.
> > [snip]
> > Anyway, I'm just throwing out some ideas, hoping that the
> > momentum doesn't get lost.
> 
> I myself would make the effort to track another list on this issues if
> one appeared immediately (although I avoid things like Yahoo groups for
> privacy concern and so would prefer something else).
> 
> However, I would suggest first attempts at defining the purpose and
> principles of a Squeak Foundation might best be done initially on the
> Squeak List. Then, discussion could move to a special mailing list after
> a few weeks or months of discussion of these topics draws together
> active participants into a critical mass.

Good points... I could go either way.  However, it looks like some discussion may be getting started on the SqueakFoundation mailing list which Cees set up, so I would encourage participation in that list so that discussion doesn't get split up among two lists.  At the very least, though, we should try to post a progress update or somesuch to the main Squeak list periodically so that everyone is aware of what's going on.

- Doug Way
  dway at riskmetrics.com


> I feel some momentum will be immediately lost if there is a separate
> list -- but I understand the concern not to clutter this list too much
> in the long term. Perhaps a prefix to emails might make this work better
> until enough momentum is acquired to necessitate a separate list? Would
> [FOUND] work?
> 
> If a Squeak Foundation is to be a success, it is important is have
> supporters among a broad range of participants, such as shareware
> developers, Disney, other major corporations, small companies, web
> developers, hobbyists, Smalltalk vendors, and educators to name a few
> categories. Many of them are here already as part of this mailing list
> which more or less defines the present Squeak Community. There are
> obviously some people who don't stay because Squeak doesn't yet meet
> their needs -- for example in terms of modularity or stability of the
> mainline release, although from previous discussions on modular squeak I
> think there are enough lurking to represent this view.
> 
> -Paul Fernhout
> Kurtz-Fernhout Software
> =========================================================
> Developers of custom software and educational simulations
> Creators of the Garden with Insight(TM) garden simulator
> http://www.kurtz-fernhout.com