Smalltalk & Squeak featured on Slashdot

Paul Fernhout pdfernhout at kurtz-fernhout.com
Sat Apr 21 14:22:32 UTC 2001


"Andrew C. Greenberg" wrote:
>> The only way to stop the fork is for SqueakC to make modularity 
>> a top priority ASAP (ideally built from textual source). 
> Nobody can stop someone who wants to write a fork. 
> Clearly noone can stop Paul from threatening one.

Andrew-

I'd appreciate a more precise use of language when you imply for example
that I am "positing threats" about a fork.

Here are what I see as the precise facts:

A. I was referring to a fork called "Stable Squeak" people other than me
have already have created for their own reasons. It is not "threatened";
it exists according to reports on this list (not having seen it myself).

B. I have tried on numerous occasions to reduce the chance of such a
fork by saying a fork will be inevitable if certain issues are not
addressed by SqueakC, because the modularity issues are too big and too
deep (and related extensive work at risk of being left behind) for
integration as usual by SqueakC. (Whether that fork needs to be public
or private is a different issue, "Stable Squeak" is still private.) We
obviously disagree on this point, but nonetheless I wouldn't call that a
"threat", but more a "prediction" or "statement of requirements".
Obviously, you see my actions differently. However, as reality
demonstrates, this prediction has come to pass with "Stable Squeak" 
whose release is imminent (entirely through the actions of others I am
unaffiliated with, except through list-related discussions).

C. FYI, If I was going to make a fork of my own at this point given the
current existence of "Stable Squeak" fork, it would be more on the basis
of establishing a clear legal title to all the contributions made to
Squeak from the original Apple release by starting from the original and
one by one re-adding changes (or making my own replacements), going
through a methodical process of establishing who the contributor was,
and getting when appropriate a signed assignment of copyright and
statement of originality from each author including those at Disney (or
a statement that they had permission to make the contribution of other
copyrighted work, or if their employer owned any IP they made that they
had the employers permission to contribute) similar to as is done by the
FSF for GNU products or for Python when it was at CNRI. That is the
other major thing I think Squeak needs (although for legal, not
community or technical reasons), but that is another topic on which we
disagree (based on our previous discussions on this list). That clear
titling process is a lot of work (and would need some level of community
acceptance to get authors to cooperate), and I think if there is a
Squeak Foundation that should be one of its goals. Because that is so
much leg work, especially for a non-modular Squeak, it might just be
easier to start from scratch or with a system that has a clearer title,
and essentially recreate Squeak. To the extent Squeak was modular, it
would be easier to establish a clear title to each module (such as
Python attempts), and drop out or replace modules from the main release
for which a clear title could not be established.

-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





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list