Hi--

      Andreas wrote:

 > What is lacking is the same thing that has always been lacking: A way
 > of making decisions which are generally accepted by the community at
 > large. As projects grow, you need a way of making such decisions and
 > for Squeak, after SqC was no longer available as the decision makers,
 > no other generally accepted body has been established.
 >
 > Last year I had really hoped Dan might be the person to break this
 > impasse. From my perspective he is the only person that pretty much
 > every member in this community can agree with. Unfortunately, it
 > didn't work out.
 >
 > But when the mightier are unavailable, the lesser have to stand up.
 > Consequently, I am running in the election this year with one and only
 > one purpose: Fix the processes. Make it possible to come to decisions
 > that are accepted by the community at large. I have started to post my
 > thoughts along these lines at [1].
 >
 > I think that if we can fix the contribution process we will see a
 > resurgence of Squeak contributions. Put this together with a
 > license-clean 4.0 and I think we'll be in a good shape for the next
 > years.

      I heartily agree with all of that, but there's more to it, 
something which ought to inform our view of the SqC period and our 
expectations for time since then.

      Clearly, the most important thing is a pool of good people. We 
still have that. What Squeak Central had, and which we have rarely had 
since, is supported time. The financial support that SqC had from Apple 
and Disney was critical to its success. It provided them the time to do 
their work, and bolstered their authority when debate arose.

      Some of us have had time to contribute when between jobs, or when 
working for companies who tolerate our participation (e.g., when using 
Squeak as part of some larger development effort). Those are both 
useful, and we should use that time where we can. SqC had something 
more. They had support (while it lasted) for full-time development of 
the core system, as an open-source project. Dan himself is a great 
example of this. Just like most of us, he was too busy doing other paid 
work last year to participate in the leadership team as he would have liked.

      Of course, establishing an environment that allows something like 
SqC to prosper is the real trick. But we shouldn't forget how important 
it was in the history of this project.


      thanks,

-C

[1] http://tinyurl.com/cmz4x4 (lists.squeakfoundation.org)