The state of the Squeak community

Martin Wirblat sql.mawi at
Thu Jan 19 11:12:26 UTC 2006

David T. Lewis wrote:
> That's not fair. Cees is going to a good deal of trouble to *get*
> our input, and he is setting clear expectations so that we know it
> will be treated is *input*. He is also making it clear that he is
> not arbitrarily changing the rules or the process; he's just trying
> to make it work well by getting more input and advice from all of us.
> This is a good thing.

He is arbitrarily cementing the rule that there is a release team that 
is free to completely ignore any opinions about what becomes the next 
Squeak release. This rule in itself is nonsense. Can this whole thing be 
called community with such a rule?

In this special case of 3.9 Stephane tries to change the language 
according to his personal views. Does it make sense to shield him 
against any criticism by defining that he is free to completely ignore 
what others think?

And there have been skeptical opinions from important persons of this 
community which is on the brink to break into two parts right now. One 
idea to solve this problem was to have a *small* core Squeak and 
building on that special distributions or "flavors". This way a 
contradiction between Traits and Tweak, which apparently exists - be it 
temporarily, practically or whatsoever, could be circumvented. We could 
have Squeak-Core and on top of that Squeak-Traits and Squeak-Tweak, 
which of course does not exclude a merge or redistribution at a later time.

Anyway, a little common sense should tell everyone that it is sensible 
to try a language change over a longer period of time than just a few 
month. This prolonged trial period and of course the freedom of choice 
would be served nicely by this release model.

Well, my strong impression is, that Stephane tries to prohibit exactly 
this and Cees seems to support him.


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list