Is this list a chat or a list REALLY ?
Karl Ramberg
karl.ramberg at chello.se
Thu Aug 9 16:06:10 UTC 2001
Stephane Ducasse wrote:
>
> Hi
>
> Sorry to be boring but could everybody think that we are damaging this list
> as a means to attract people to Squeak just because lot of emails are
> "bar-talks"?
>
> Am I the only one ***really*** bored?
I found most of the diffrent threads on education *really* interesting.
>
> I think that lot of important topics like the following ones could be
> discussed:
>
> - why the open-source model of squeak does not work?
> For example I do not really know the other open source movements but
> it seems that we could have
> - call for improvement where people could argue why a
> crucial change have to be done.
>
> - much better enhancement integration instead of waiting that SqC
> agrees or does the job (I think that this should not be their role).
> I have the feeling that Squeak is not open. This is not intended
> against SqC but against the process itself.
Yup, lots of fixes go past SqC. Since no single person stepped forward
to do
this tedious but important task, we probably should make some way of
collaborating to get them collected and tested and submitted to SqC
for inclusion. Anybody got a good idea of how to do this?
Karl
>
> I'm thinking that we are too self-oriented and not looking for
> successes of the other communities.
>
> - having a infrastructure that support changes identification in a
> much better way that changeset so that we can built a squeak from a
> list of modules.
>
> - For example VMMkaer is a good way to support the distribution and
> building of VM
>
> So I expect at least one of you to say just do it!
> I do what I can ;)
>
> But are you really sure that I'm wrong.
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|