>> Yes, it is quite an interesting situation IMHO, and one that most  
>> of us
> could foresee too I think.
>
> NOTE: Read the following with a nice bucket of love, ok?

sure :)

> I don't intend
> to make anyone upset. :) And sorry for the long post.
>
> On one hand I really appreciate the Pharo project - lots of good  
> people
> doing lots of good progress etc. It seems to be doing simply great.
>
> On the other hand the "negative" effect I can see is the "drain" it  
> has
> caused (I think) from squeak.org/squeak-dev. In other words,  
> squeak.org
> has lost a lot of momentum, and of course not only due to the birth of
> Pharo I should add. And in many ways Pharo may also be the "rescue" to
> squeak.org. God knows we have been trying to find "our way" lately and
> with... less impressive results. :)
>
> So... how will the future evolve? Does the Squeak community (in the
> large sense) have anything to gain from keeping both the squeak.org  
> and
> the pharo fork "alive"?

I think that squeak has a momentum and should naturally continue to  
exist.

> I presume we have at least the following three scenarios:
>
> 1. Continue as now and take no specific action. This will probably  
> lead
> to Squeak.org going weaker and Pharo stronger by the day. Developers
> will want to be where the "action" is. Soon squeak.org turns  
> irrelevant
> and dies a slow death.

Not necessarily. It depends what squeakers want to achieve.
It is not clear to me.


> 2. Take some decisive action and "merge" the two in some *smart* way
> beneficial to both. Impossible? I hope not.

I do not know. We left for specific reasons and I do not see how
they could be solved. Then the magic: "develop for both" does not work  
in general
because software is complex. too complex.

> 3. Just kill off squeak.org. A mercy kill :). Then people could move
> over to Pharo without having to think about it - there is no other  
> "Squeak".

I do not think that this is wise. Now people should think why and what  
they are doing.
So far pharo is not taking the multimedia space: so if squeakers want  
to continue
or even better build (or rebuild) it:
Imagine some great libraries and scenario that focus on delivering  
high-quality
multimedia experiences. Then this would be cool. May be squeak would  
run on top
of pharo :)))))

> Eh, well, my analysis is probably full of silly holes here. Looking at
> the above, 1 and 3 feels less nice. So how could a "merge" look that
> would be attractive to *both* camps?

which camps? :)


> I call the theoretical merged
> project Phreak below (but I am not proposing name changes etc, but I
> need a name to use in the text).
>
> Pharo characteristics:
>
> - A small "benevolent dictator" board. Lots of action, less talk.
> - Has a very clear stated "direction".
> - Has a website using CMSBox.
> - Uses Google code for issue tracker and wiki.
> - Has Mailman mailinglists and downloads at gforge.inria.fr (I think)
>
> Squeak.org org characteristics:
>
> - Has an elected SOB, an election process and a Team model. The jury  
> is
> still out I think, we seem to have lots of trouble "getting shit  
> done".
> - Has very little stated "direction" at the moment.
> - Has a website using Swazoo.
> - Uses Mantis, Swiki, file archive and Mailman on a community paid
> Hetzner server.
>
> Now... why would Squeak.org want to merge with Pharo?
>
> Pros: Get momentum back. 1 + 1 = 2. A revitalization. Very important!
>
> Cons: The SOB & Team model would probably have to be dropped. The work
> made since Pharo forked may or may not be a "lost cause", that depends
> on if Phreak is interested in utilizing that work. Other cons?
>
> ...and Pharo?
>
> Pros: An influx of developers. A much stronger position as Phreak  
> would
> be Squeak + Pharo. No "compatibility" to worry about, Squeak is out of
> the picture.
>
> Cons: Some people in Pharo may perceive such a merge as dangerous  
> since
> they might be afraid that certain aspects of Squeak.org (that Pharo  
> was
> created in order to escape from) is coming back "knocking on the  
> door".

I'm not that convinced.
Let us see that if Squeak would be really active and share common  
interest
for cleaning and delivering good abstractions for multimedia and other
you could see Squeak/phreak based on pharo and this could be cool.
Now so far I see not that much progress.

> I personally don't think there is such a danger if Phreak simply  
> adopts
> the simple organisation of Pharo (with board and all) BUT... since it
> would make the Pharo community much *larger* the effects of that  
> growth
> need to be taken into account. But Pharo should not fear growth,  
> because
> that would be an odd position.
>
> How could a merge be done practically? I really don't know :).

me neither.

> And I
> must stop typing now, this post is waaaaay to long anyway and I have
> probably stepped on too many toes already.

Not really.

>
> regards, Göran
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> Pharo-project at lists.gforge.inria.fr
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project