Hi tim

I lost your preceeding email and I completely agree. I think that any 
process or changes needs
external reviewers. Taking responsibility of something is a "big" 
effort in terms of quality, documentation, testing. So it should also 
be open to critic reviews....We did not decided yet if and how we will 
proceed but what is really important is that if somebody else want to 
take responsibility of the kernel and work with us to include the 
fixes, tell us, alternatively anybody interested in fixing the 
classBuilder, and the Behavior/Class.... core is welcome.

I do not want that people believe that we do that for power/fun, 
because we coudl to the same without thinking to give it back to Squeak 
or changing Smalltalks. For us this will be an effort and certainly 
slow us down.

The point raised by Roel was not to spend time to help and seen the 
changes just discarded by lack of resources by the harvesters, and the 
best way to make squeak survive to the after SqueakC period is having a 
good process with tests and kind of owenership (based on agreement
and external review!!!!!). After spending days looking at the old 
modules system I can tell you that I would have vote against its final 
inclusion for understandibility reason. So this means that we should 
think in terms of a process that ensures: speed, quality, and changes.

Note that I do not like the "taking control" metaphor, because I ssee 
that more as a hard work
than a powering situation. I prefer taking responsibility.


Stef





Prof. Dr. Stéphane DUCASSE (ducasse at iam.unibe.ch) 
http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~ducasse/
  "if you knew today was your last day on earth, what would you do
  different? ... especially if, by doing something different, today
  might not be your last day on earth" Calvin&Hobbes