Harvesting Process is not working

ducasse ducasse at iam.unibe.ch
Sun Nov 2 11:47:44 UTC 2003


Hi

I should say that I understand the frustration of marcus, even if I 
harvested less than him.

This is so easy to say thank for harvesting, thank for that or XX and 
Y. you know this is
like happy new year, you can say that to every body without thinking a 
word
of that. But this is important to understand that we do not care of 
thank
we care about others PARTICIPATING. lot of people complain about the 
lack of
documentation of Squeak I got only ONE private email following my 
proposal to offer
my latex file to produce a simple QuickRef and first touch with the 
system. So...

What marcus did not say is that we were thinking to STOP. I think that 
when we harvest
something now we are destroying the process itself because we give the 
impression that it is working.
Why would I have to bother because the changes I produced get 
harvested....Sure why?

My point is that everybody that value Squeak should participate with 
various degree but looking
at changes take normally one evening. In two hours, good guys can do a 
LOT. Now we are merely a couple and be prepared the situation will get 
worse if you do not participate because we will give up. Daniel is 
going to study and we will start to be really pissed of.

I think that this is important to realize that marcus should spend his 
time on introducing a better AST/Scanner/Parser than harvesting. This 
does not mean that he should not harvest but we should be MORE to 
review and harvest. This is the same with KCP. Have you seen the number 
of times
we got to change changesets because they rot. So I could do far more 
than that but I have to wait that
they get reviewed. It is much easier for me to only work on my research 
because I get articles and
I can show how smart I'm, or write cool stuff (Yes this is me that code 
it look how I'm cool).

May be one of these days we should just do what we like and do not care 
about Squeak.

Stef



On Dimanche, nov 2, 2003, at 12:21 Europe/Zurich, Marcus Denker wrote:

>
> The Harvesting process as defined (over a year!!) ago is not working.
>
> So, personally I am really interested what people think about this.
>
> Especially valuable would be the input of those happily submitting
> changesets, but not participating in the review process: How do you
> think this can possibly work? "I don't have time". No. This wrong:
> People have time to participate in elaborate huge dicussions on this
> list, they have time to actually produce changesets and submitt them.
>
> Time can't be the problem. "reviewing" a simple change does not take
> that much time. So what's the problem? too complicated? Not worth
> the effort? Sometimes I think most people on the squeak-dev list
> would be perfectly fine if we just declare Squeak to be finished:
> Per definition, Smalltalk is the best language ever, so why change
> anything? Just a round of bugfixed all 6 Months, that's it.
>
> Actually, I think we are in just this state allready for more than
> 2 years.  Have you ever tried to explain somebody what's new in 3.6?
> There is *nothing*. There was nothing new in 3.5. And not much in 3.4,
> either. Squeak is dead.
>
>       Marcus
>
> -- 
> Marcus Denker marcus at ira.uka.de  -- Squeak! http://squeak.de
>
>




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list