First a few observations:

1. Class comments are good in general.  80 classes with not one single
class comment is rather extremely uncommented.

2. On the other hand, I would be happy for Squeak to have the
multinationization code in it even without comments.  In fact, I'd feel
that way about just about functionality you can name.

3. It is a shame to think about *anything* that will slow harvesting
down even further.  Please let us think carefully before adding any more
barriers; instead, file it as a wishlist bug on mantis and we can
revisit it if and when harvesting becomes so fast that we have time to
impose a higher burden on that process.

4. As well, it's a shame to put pressure on people doing good work, even
without comments.  (And I do think there is such a thing.  :))   Let us
also keep in mind that raising the bar means that there are more coders
who just won't bother to contribute any longer.  This gets back to #2:
if it came down to a take-it or leave-it situation, how often would we
really want to leave it?

Given all of the above, how about the following strategy: as long as a
change moves Squeak forward, let's put it in, but add a bug report that
it needs comments?  Uncomented but useful code is a step forward (and in
the case of m18n, a big step!).  Adding comments is another step.  Why
should we insist that both steps be taken at once?  The Squeak project
has many thousands of steps in front of it.


Lex