> From: Jecel Assumpcao Jr
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 3:40 PM
> 
> Ron Teitelbaum wrote:
> > The performance improvements of a Strongtalk VM appear to be quite
> > substantial.
> 
> Indeed, but you can get the same results by getting a faster machine and
> running Squeak on that.
> 
> > There are a number of other things that interest me, including
> > the compiling of code based on what code is used.
> 
> My own interest in this kind of thing is not new:
> http://www.merlintec.com/old-self-interest/msg00190.html
> 

This is very interesting.  

While it is true that computers are going faster now then most people could
possibly use them and bottle neck issues are usually not cpu related but
network related, performance improvements could be significant for a number
of projects, especially large server projects.


> > It would be difficult,
> > considering the people involved in the strongtalk project and given
> Dan's
> > comments, to dismiss this opportunity with, "been there, done that".
> 
> People have worked hard in the past with the expectation that our
> community would adopt their work (see first exceptions package, modules
> for 3.3, various GUI enhancements) and then became very frustrated when
> that failed to happen. My intention is not at all to discourage such a
> project.
> 
I understand.  This has been difficult for me to really understand but I
have seen the frustration around the base image, and giving credit and
assigning responsibilities where appropriate.  

> > I
> > assume that the Strongtalk community will develop with or without
> Squeak,
> 
> Is that true? I am asking because I really have no idea. In the past Sun
> has tended to release stuff as open source when it no longer has any
> interest in investing in it further and the developers have been
> diverted to work full time on Java related things.

I guess that is still yet to be determined.  But from what I see on the
strongtalk group, and if I read Dan's reaction appropriately, and the
possibility of his participation, it appears that they are moving along.
They are already receiving some community submissions.  People are helping
get the vm compiled on newer software platforms.
> 
> > the real question is should we as a community work closely with
> strongtalk
> > so that a strongtalking squeak vm is an option, even if it is not fully
> > adopted by the community?
> 
> "We as a community" can't really do anything to help. But a few of us as
> individuals have the needed knowledge for such a project and I am sure
> that anyone doing it will be able to find the information they need
> here, in #squeak and on the vm list.
> 
> > I do understand the argument of compatibility vs. performance, but
> > performance should not be discounted, especially if the gains are
> > significant, if this community is ready to move into business
> application
> > development.
> 
> Note that I have focused on the performance side of things and mostly
> ignored compatibility. But the community is large (far larger than you
> would think from just looking at squeak-dev, at least) and diverse so
> people have different interests. So one person feels that Squeak must
> have native widgets or it will die while another likes that the GUI is
> identical on all platforms. Another would like access to all the neat
> libraries in their OS while someone else wants to run Squeak on the raw
> hardware and prefers plug-ins developed in Squeak itself. So I don't
> think it is possible for the community to move in any particular
> direction.

I definitely appreciate this comment.  It seems to me that the community is
suffering from exactly what you describe.  Although I do believe that you
are correct in many respects, I feel that this community would benefit from
more organization and direction, especially since it appears that the
community having trouble with the transition to a volunteer driven
community.  The volunteer's still need to stand up and take over before this
community will move forward.  I also feel that no matter your interest
everyone will benefit from organization and direction.  If we find a way to
provide tools for business developers (which I'm pushing for), which include
security, deployment support, multiple window support, business protocols,
and yes native widgets these things could still benefit even those that are
developing eToys, $100 laptops or even 3d virtual spaces!  (Imagine sending
out hundreds of thousands of $100 laptops only to have them all crash with a
single virus).  Organization and direction is the way to go, even if not
everyone agrees with it, or it doesn't help everyone.  Besides we could try
to agree on the process and the rules for getting things included to help
bring back in discouraged contributors.   

- Ron