Harvesters (was: [squeak-dev] Waiting for 3.11 artifacts.)

David T. Lewis lewis at mail.msen.com
Wed Dec 10 05:07:27 UTC 2008

On Tue, Dec 09, 2008 at 01:00:36PM +0100, G?ran Krampe wrote:
> Many of us who have been around for a while know that we have tried 
> numerous approaches over the years and we know that many of these have 
> failed due to various reasons. For example, the idea of "harvesting" and 
> having so called "harvesters" failed because it only led to a few people 
> burning out (in the very early years it "worked" because we had paid 
> people doing the harvesting).

I cannot help but suspect that the task of harvesting is inherently
hard work that requires human communication, intelligence, and
motivation. While the work certainly can be streamlined with
better tools, it should also be possible to improve by making
it more enjoyable.

That's the reason that I like Edgar's emphasis on "Fun Squeak",
regardless of the specific tools employed. It is also the reason
that I liked the old BFAV (Bug Fix Archive Viewer) process. The
tool had problems, but using it and participating in the process
was enjoyable and accessible to the entire community.

The harvesters approach did not fail.The quality of the work
was very good, and the results were both successful and broadly
accepted by the community. That sounds like success to me.


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list