[Squeakfoundation][ANN][IMPORTANT] Mission statement

goran.hultgren at bluefish.se goran.hultgren at bluefish.se
Fri Nov 15 11:07:03 UTC 2002


cg at cdegroot.com (Cees de Groot) wrote:
>  <danielv at netvision.net.il> said:
> >1. Splitting the squeak-dev list - since all such discussions until now
> >took place there. I don't have a strong opinion, but it's something that
> >should bee discussed at length, on the squeak-dev list, where the people
> >affected by it currently all reside.
> 
> I think it's a separate discussion. Let's leave it for now, it muddles things
> too much (IMHO, etcetera).
> 
> >2. Us Guides would like to be able to do our job. I think we need a
> >medium on which we can talk, without it being used for myriad other
> >discussions at the same time, and without threads being pulled to
> >directions that may be important in the long term, or wider context, but
> >don't get the next version out the door. We don't want to use private
> >email, because that creates a disconnect we don't like. We could for
> >example create yet another squeak list (squeak-guides?), and make that
> >read only.
> 
> I think that's a good idea. I also think it's a good idea to 'hijack' the SqF
> list for the time being (but without setting it to moderated), but when time
> comes, it's probably best to setup a separate list. 
> 
> (Personally, I'm still in favor of establishing a foundation (or similar
> legal entity), if only to have something firm to start negotiating with
> Apple on licensing and to receive donations. I see the Guides and SqF as
> complementary things)


I agree. We start with the SqF list, then create a separate guide-list
and make that read only.
That list will work as our perpetual protocol and should not be muddled.
Crossposting is of course still available.
And I agree that an SqF entity is still desirable, but that it is a
separate thing.

regards, Göran




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list