Squeak 3.8 status

goran.krampe at bluefish.se goran.krampe at bluefish.se
Tue Jul 27 09:55:25 UTC 2004

Hi people!

Doug Way <dway at mailcan.com> wrote:
> On Monday, July 26, 2004, at 02:20 PM, Steven Riggins wrote:
> > Hello folks!
> >
> > We've begun work on TK4 in Tweak.  One of the issues that has come up 
> > is the internationalization work that Michael and Yoshiki are working 
> > on.
> >
> > Since TK4 depends on this work, I'd like to get a sense of the 3.8 
> > status.  I've seen notes from as far back as January, but I don't 
> > think 3.8 is done yet.
> There was originally talk (early this year) of getting the 
> internationalization work in 3.7, but the i18n changes were major 
> enough that Michael & Yoshiki needed a stable point at which to add the 
> changes, instead of the constantly shifting base of 3.7alpha.  So 
> they're being added now as the first item in 3.8alpha, without having 
> to have any other changes go in first.
> 3.8 is not done yet, it only recently started.
> > I'd like to see 3.8 nailed down to just these changes and finished.

Eh... perhaps you actually mean 3.7? That is after all the release we
are just about to make.
> Well, 3.8 was tentatively planned to be a shorter/smaller release 
> (coordinated with the 64-bit 4.0 release) so something like this 
> *might* work out.  But we need to hear from the 64-bit folks on this.
> (disclaimer: I'm just now looking up "TK4" on Google, although I'm 
> familiar with Tweak & Croquet)
> > As more and more people learn about Squeak/Tweak and more projects 
> > start to rely on the wonderful work you do, we're going to need more 
> > stable versions than less stable versions, and shorter development 
> > cycles for each iteration.

Let me just point out a small fact that we all IMHO should be aware of:

The open Squeak community (as differentiated from closed projects like
Croquet) doesn't have access to Tweak. I have personally just recently
*seen* it for the first time. I have no idea about the goals or plans
for Tweak. I have no idea how the involved persons joined the project
and I have no idea about release plans or licenses or anything else
regarding Tweak.

I am guessing it will be released to us soon, and I am guessing it will
be under a reasonable license, and I am guessing it is meant to become a
Morphic replacement and I am guessing that the project will eventually
be developed in an open fashion too. And these guesses are also my

Now, perhaps people think I am too harsh and you get annoyed with me for
saying all this. I am not saying that Tweak *must* be open - it can be a
closed project and I have absolutely no right to criticize it for that.
Heck, I assume there are tons of closed projects out there using Squeak
as a base platform!

But my focus is the open Squeak. The stuff we all share. And my focus is
the plans laid out for improving and developing open Squeak - in a
community fashion. In the open source fashion.

I *love* all those closed projects using Squeak because that is GOOD for
Squeak! :)

But I *don't* give those projects a single thought when it comes to the
plans for the open Squeak.

So... if anyone want me as a Guide to consider how Tweak should be
handled in Squeak - then I am sorry, I don't have an opinion and I can't
plan for it, in that respect Tweak doesn't exist yet.

And again - please don't get upset at me! :) The Tweak team is fully
aware of this and my personal guess is that they *like* to work on it
"on their own" and thus are waiting as long as they possibly can until
they open it up to the rest of us. Again, that is *their* choice. 

> Unfortunately these last two (more stability and shorter development 
> cycles) are in conflict with each other.  Well, you can decrease the 
> overall amount of change in Squeak and then I guess you could get both 
> of those things.  Or, try to improve the development process in general 
> (e.g. have the equivalent of some direct "committers"), which we're 
> working on, but that's not easy.
> Anyway, 3.7 is taking about 9 months instead of the originally planned 
> 6 months, so I agree that is too long.  But getting the releases 
> significantly faster than every 6 months... ain't gonna happen anytime 
> soon.  It would require someone else taking over the release process 
> from me (for starters), and doing a lot of work on the process...

Yes, I think 6 months is a reasonable goal. If you want to be faster
than that - then you will have to track the stream or to upgrade
selected packages yourself. As SM progresses it will be much easier to
keep selected parts (packages) up to date yourself.

A package-ified Squeak with a good dependency system would give each
Squeaker much more control of how "stable" or "daredevil" he/she wants
to be for selected parts of Squeak.

And as Doug wrote we are considering to try some improvements to the
development process now in 3.8alpha.

> - Doug

regards, Göran

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list