[RANT] Come on people! ;)

Stéphane Rollandin lecteur at zogotounga.net
Tue Dec 21 10:13:09 UTC 2004


Doug Way wrote:
> Even with "no offense intended", saying that you think someone should 
> resign is still a somewhat ridiculous thing to say, given that you're 
> just arguing about general direction strategies. 


now that I think about this, actually, why is this ridiculous ? why 
can't you mess with the Guides strategies ? what is the political 
structure of this group ? benevolent dictatorship ? co-optation such as 
the ranking system in SqueakPeople ? how are decisions taken, and how 
should they be taken? if I remember correctly when the Guides first 
appeared (because SqC vanished) they were supposed to be changing every 
few months or so (or was it years ?), then what ?

understand that I am not complaining here, nor being offensive to 
anyone. I'm just trying to understand what kind of forces drive the 
development of Squeak. my only source of information is this list, which 
I have been reading almost extensively for several years, and at the 
moment many trends in what is said here just confuse me (and also show 
me that some other people are confused).

this is why I first wrote the post were I exposed my concerns about the 
possible breaking apart of the system. to which Göran answered that I 
was plain wrong, while at the same time he said to someone else that 
there should be no guidelines because this is an open source project 
where everybody just does what he likes, no more no less. so I quoted 
this and asked "why are you Guide then ?" in that ackward joke-like 
manner where I admit I've been unnecessarily provocative.

but still at this time I have no response. confusion remains.


regards,

Stef




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list