Here is another take on it:

1) The OS/X Cocoa team is not responsible for fixing code in iMovie or 
even QuickTime when an API changes.
2) Currently Squeak does not have any stable API definitions between 
components of the system.
3) It is harder in Squeak to locate changes in the API of classes you 
depend upon, because there is no compile time checking that the input 
objects still have the same methods.  (Even Java can not tell you if 
the behavior of the method changes).  And I am NOT advocating compile 
time type checking.

It seems like this is an opportunity for a new tool, or language 
feature (like traits), that allows formal definition of APIs, and 
checks for changes between versions.  This would be a kind of DIFF but 
on the method signatures of classes rather than the source code.  It 
would be great if this was part of MC since it has access to multiple 
versions of the system.  Then a maintainer of multi-media packages 
could identify the changes to other modules, and locate senders of 
altered or removed methods.

Michael



On Dec 14, 2004, at 12:46 PM, Michael Latta wrote:

> It seems to me that the Squeak community has an issue.  The issue is 
> similar to what I face in my day job.
>
> 1) There are not enough programmers to go around.
> 2) There are users wanting to use the multi-media features of Squeak, 
> and want the programmers to work on that.
> 3) There are programmers willing to work on making the core system 
> better, but are not trained or able to work on the multi-media aspects 
> of the system.
> 4) The multi-media features require the core to work.
>
> So you can ask Stephane all you want to work on multi-media, but that 
> is not an option (from comments posted earlier).  Wishing will not 
> make that so.  This is not uncaring, just reality.  If there are 
> programmers willing and able to work on multi-media aspects, they will 
> need to adjust to a changing core, or they can argue that the core is 
> fine, and needs no changes.  As I see it either Stephane and company 
> can either improve the core of Squeak, with others helping for the 
> multi-media changes, or they will be forced to start a separate 
> Smalltalk project, and the Squeak community risks losing not just 
> them, but those that are interested in the core more than multi-media. 
>  If that happens, the core could stagnate, and so on.  I applaud 
> Stephane and company for coming back to working with this community, 
> and Andreas for questioning how to keep the multi-media aspects 
> functional and improving as well.  If the multi-media types bail that 
> is the same as a fork, it is just a silent one.
>
> So, painful as it may be, keep talking.  The result will be better for 
> all concerned.
>
> Michael
>
>
>
> On Dec 14, 2004, at 12:18 PM, Jeffrey T. Read wrote:
>
>> On Dec 14, 2004, at 2:38 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:
>>>
>>> No Nihilism. Just calm reasoning. The list has gotten a constant 
>>> source of frustration where it used to be a source of inspiration 
>>> and if that's so one needs to ask oneself if it's actually worth 
>>> spending that much time on it (it's not like I have nothing else to 
>>> do). And given the recent discussion it feels like my interests are 
>>> so out of sync with the prevailing opinion around here that I'm the 
>>> lonely trouble maker. If that's the case then what better thing to 
>>> do than to let go? It's not that I wouldn't work on the aspects that 
>>> interest me - just that I'd shut up and let you guys go your way. 
>>> The more I'm thinking about it, the more sense this makes to me.
>>>
>>
>> Actually, I'm with you on this one, Andreas: I mean the whole point 
>> of Squeak it seems, is to be a MULTIMEDIA smalltalk, yes? If people 
>> are going to strip it down to the bare essentials because they're 
>> more interested in software engineering, Web development, or 
>> something like that, that's OK for their own stuff but if they want 
>> to build Squeak they need to be inclusive of the things which make 
>> Squeak Squeak: that includes things like etoys, Wonderland, the sound 
>> synth stuff, etc. I mean if you want Cincom, you know where to find 
>> it.
>>
>> To me, Squeak is about breaking new ground in the world of human 
>> computer interaction. The future of the computer interface is in 
>> using all of your senses, especially vision and hearing and perhaps 
>> touch; and kinaesthetic and motor responses. We will go from an 
>> abstract level where you use the "thinking part of your brain" to get 
>> things done, to a more fundamental level which is based on feeling, 
>> instinct, and inspiration. Squeak is at the wavefront of this 
>> tremendous phenomenon; and as such, until something better comes 
>> along to supplant them (Tweak? Croquet?) Morphic, Etoys, and 
>> Wonderland are all VERY MUCH a part of Squeak.
>>
>> --Jeff
>>
>>
>
>