Peter, you have a good idea but you are looking at Squeak as the wrong
kind of project.  It is not a single application that does one thing. 
The individual applications built in Squeak *do* have a small team of
dedicated programmers: EToys, Croquet, Scratch, the Berne group, Squat,
L, etc. etc.

But for Squeak as a whole?  A better analogy, as I've often argued, is
to compare it to a Linux distribution.  Squeak as a whole needs to
support all of us working together using the same basic code base. 
Squeak-as-a-whole fails if everyone forks off and uses their own Squeak,
never to re-merge.  But heck, even if that happens, it's not the end of
the world.  It only means we are more like Scheme than like Debian, with
everyone pursuing independent, incompatibly paths.  The ideas will still
be in each independent path.

(And given this, I think we should model our processses after linux
distributions, or after SE processes that develop *suites* of
applications, not after SE processes or open source groups that are
building *individual* applications.)

Lex

PS -- why do we see so many depressed posts?  Things seem to be
progressing nicely, to me.