SqC, StSq & SqF (I love acronyms!)

Göran Hultgren gohu at rocketmail.com
Thu May 24 10:43:27 UTC 2001


Hi all! (again...)

First of all, I am just a Squeaker that wrote an article on the prerelease of StSq - I am not one
of the Squeak-gods. I am just trying to "push the process" a little. It is not my intention to
create any tension between anyone, ok? :-) :-)

Here goes:

--- Dan Ingalls <Dan.Ingalls at disney.com> wrote:
> Paul McDonough <wnchips at home.com> wrote...
> >What's needed is solid collaboration and coordination (via discussion
> >and sharing) amongst SqC, SqF, StSq, and for that matter Camp Smalltalk
> >and a host of other Squeak/Smalltalk oriented projects.
> 
> I agree.  What made me write was a feeling that this wasn't happening.  Two examples are:
> 
> 	1.  A separate mailing list got formed for SqF, and people 
> 	who need to be a part of the SqF process aren't following it.
> 	In particular the StSq work as a potential base for future
> 	mainline Squeak releases is mentioned.

Well, I haven't engaged in SqF until now so I can't really say anything. Now I jumped in this
morning, read through the complete mailing list archive and scanned the complete Swiki. My very,
very, very personal summary:

1. There are some basic stuff up (mailinglist, swiki, a few members signed up) - GOOD
2. A lot of good intentions from a group of recognized solid Squeakers. - GOOD
3. A lot of... well, how should I put it without being to harsh. "Talk." :-) - NOT SO GOOD
4. One pragmatic list of actions from Joern Eyrich - GOOD
5. A few very good emails from Dan Ingalls about SqC, StSq, SqF - VERY GOOD IMO
6. Very few emails from StSq guys - NOT SO GOOD

> 	2.  It feels as though there's a desire to put out StSq 2.8
> 	as a thing unto itself, rather than as a testbed for a 
> 	reformulation of the next Squeak release.

This purpose of using StSq as a testbed for a reformulation of the next Squeak release was not
known by me until after reading your email to me about this (which I got today).

Anyway, I think it sounds great!

But does that mean that StSq should never "release" anything to "the public = Squeak community"? I
am a little puzzled by this - and that was the reason for my posting in the first place! Proposal
below.

> >Alliance can be so-o-o-o much more powerful than union, sometimes.
> 
> I can see how this may be powerful in some sense.  But if that becomes the focus, then I can
> imagine energy flowing into StSq2.8 as a fork rather than Sq3.2 (or whatever) as a join.  And

Yep, the risk of forking - would be bad indeed. Fully agree.

> also it would feel like more of an alliance if there were an occasional message from the StSq
> folks along the lines of "we just got the font swap (say) done, and it looks easy to recreate in
> 3.1 whenever the time is right".

Well, I can not answer on the "silence" of the StSq guys. I tried to address it in the article
though. But I assume it can be fixed from now on! :-)

> Instead, almost the first report is about "unleashing StSq 2.8".

Whoa, hold on for a minute here! :-) That was not a "report" from StSq but a posting from me -
perhaps it sounded as if it was a report from StSq but I am NOT a part of the core team! But since
they are so "darn" quiet somebody has to say something, right? ;-) ;-) (lots of smileys here)

I was trying to start this discussion (that we now are having - goal accomplished) and the word
"unleash" was not meant to imply anything but to acknowledge the potential problems that may
arise.

In short: I have taken a look at StSq and like what I see. From the activity I have seen it feels
like it is nearing some form of "workable state". Since I am AGAINST FORKING (saying this one more
time just to make sure) I started to ask the mailinglist how we should handle this. I had not at
the time read through the SqF mailinglist. I am still puzzled about what we should do with StSq
though.

I really like the idea of mergeing back the good stuff from StSq into Squeak 3.2 or something -
that is clearly "The Right Thing To Do". But I also feel that StSq is sortof caught inbetween here
- on the one side people are (rightfully IMHO) annoyed with them for not sharing, and on the other
people are annoyed that they would release something!

Ok, lets make this simple (my stupid proposal):

1. StSq, please, release the prerelease stuff to the community! People are calling StSq a
"mystical secret society" - that is very bad. Smack it up and put a BIG SIGN on it saying "TESTBED
for new stuff coming in Squeak 3.x - BEWARE, not a supported release, will end up being merged
into Squeak 3.x, blabla...". This can be done in a few hours. Just do it as we Squeakers say. :-)
It is not a fork.

2. StSq and SqF, you should "merge" IMHO and thus open up StSq and strengthen SqF. There are
people in SqF that wants to build an open organization around Squeak and stuff in StSq will be
instrumental in that. The StSq guys are so busy coding and love doing it - and doing it well, that
they obviously need help in opening up and communicating to the world. Come on, cooperate.

2. SqC, keep on doing what you do - Dan's emails to the SqF mailinglist sounded really good.

> The SqF has also been remiss in this regard.  Hopefully it will soon be more proactive and
> propose/declare its role in the community.

Yep.
 
End of blabber, regards, Göran

PS. Ok, a fire I got... ;-) DS

=====
Göran Hultgren, goran.hultgren at bluefish.se
icq#:6136722, GSM: +46 70 3933950, http://www.bluefish.se
"Department of Redundancy department." -- ThinkGeek

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list