Igor Stasenko wrote:
> 2008/12/7 Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de>:
>> How exactly are these two statements related? Why does a dislike for traits
>> imply that 3.8 is perfect?
> 
> i refer to Edgar's comment about 3.8 and what is gone 'wrong' after it.

I re-read Edgar's comments again but I still don't see anything in them 
that could be construed as framing 3.8 as perfect or denying progress. 
Edgar points out (correctly) that 3.8 was the last release that had wide 
consensus, he points out (again correctly) that many of the major forks 
are 3.8 based. He then goes on saying that 3.9 was "pain for all" and 
concludes by pointing out that 3.10 release team was trying to play it 
safe. All of it seems to be quite accurate from what I can tell.

> My point :
> 
> Is it RIGHT to not do anything , because there is always someone who
> will be discontented with it?

Of course not. That is so obvious it doesn't even bear mentioning. But 
then again, has that ever happened? Or is that likely to happen? We have 
seen constant improvements in Squeak, mostly non-controversial and in my 
experience, the situations where you find great resistance are almost 
exclusively those where one side is absolutely unwilling to adopt to 
concerns and push things with pseudo justifications like "this is for 
your own benefit". If it were, you wouldn't have to force people to use 
it - you would make it accessible so that people have the option and 
then, when its value is established, you can come back and make a real 
case why it should be included by default. This is how the process 
should have gone with traits.

Cheers,
   - Andreas