Hi Russell and all!

I am replying a bit out of order here, taking the shorter ones first.

NOTE: Btw, this is ME talking, not on behalf of the others - but I am
quite sure they agree with what I am saying. And we aren't suddenly
going to talk with one voice - we are still a part of this community as
individuals, just like the rest of you.

"Russell Penney" <russell.penney at tincanct.com> wrote:
> I have to back Lex's comments completely on this one. These are the sort of
> things that REALLY make me think seriously about just forgetting about
> Squeak and moving on.

I will reply to Lex post shortly.
 
> I am sorry if this sounds harsh, but I feel we are now going to have the
> "in" crowds ideas forced into Squeak whether we like it or not. Namespaces
> here we come.

No, no, no.... "in" crowd? What is that?

And regarding namespaces - absolutely not You are implying that the
decision process would be radically different now - that we would "push"
things onto the community like tyrants. That is not how it works - the
community would kick us in the butt if we pulled any stunts like that.
In fact, I think it is the direct opposite - now with this
responsibility we will take extra care because we really don't want to
fail your trust. Well, I am still hoping that we will earn your trust.

So things are going to continue very, very much like before in a totally
open fashion discussing things on this list - but hopefully with the
difference that issues *do* come to conclusions and that things are
followed up properly and either get done or get cancelled.

Anyone thinking that we are doing this for some kind of power trip
hasn't read what I wrote carefully, or I really failed in communicating
what this is. This is bloody painful people, not some fun power trip. ;)
(I gotta throw in some humour, to lighten this up a bit)

Lots of people have been complaining over the years for a lack of "real"
leadership. I was the one that came up with the Guides idea in the
beginning, and it was my way of handling the task I was given by SqC
(yes, at OOPSLA waaay back) - the task of getting some kind of "board"
together for taking over after SqC stepping back. At that time I felt
that taking over the leadership in a more decisive way, like we are
doing now, wasn't going to work. And I still think that was the case.

Now, after a few years we feel that it is high time to take more
responsibility. And that is what this is about - taking more
responsibility.

I am *intent* on explaining this over and over and in as much detail as
you like - we really, really are committed to this - to get the Squeak
community better organized. That is what this is about.

> Quite frankly if more effort was put into fixing things rather
> than forcing language changes to suit a small group, Squeak would be much
> better off!

Noone is forcing language changes onto anyone. Just because I have
happened to discuss my namespace/prefix implementation in parallell with
what has been going on, doesn't mean anything at all. In fact, the
*only* reason it came up was because Steph said he didn't like it (in
some context I can't remember) and I wanted to know why.

I repeat, repeat, repeat, and please do believe me on this one: We are
not introducing ANY namespace solution in any near time. This has been
said repeatedly, and by Doug also. Please hear me on that one, ok? :)

And for other changes - sure, Squeak evolves, but in the open
cooperative manner that we all want I dare say. AFAIK there are no big
language changes (or any other changes that haven't already been
discussed on this list prior to this) that are being planned. There is
NO hidden agenda. Ok?

> How about running a poll to see how many people actually support this
> endeavour of yours? My guess is very few but of course tyrants don't need
> polls, do they?

Sure, we can run a poll - anyone is free to do that. I just want to
remind you that the people in this group are people doing lots and lots
for Squeak and have been doing so for a long time. We aren't talking
about a few people just jumping into this.

We feel it is time that someone takes charge. And this is an *interim*
solution until SqF formation gets its stuff in place. Let me repeat
that: This is an *interim* solution.

> Very annoyed
> Russell

I really hope I am answering your concerns (and others) and that you
will reconsider and perhaps read the ANNouncement once again. This is
not some hostile power trip. We are doing this because we think it is a
good thing to do. We need a decision body, that is it.

I will gladly answer private email or keep on replying until all your
questions are answered.

regards, Göran