Juan Vuletich wrote:
> No matter how many times we said this, from what I see in responses to 
> this thread, it seems people still don't get it.

Not unexpectedly ;-) I can see both sides though; on the one hand it's 
difficult to describe exactly where Squeak will be without having a set 
of known resources. On the other hand, the question of where Squeak is 
headed is certainly a fair one. As a result, I'm trying to answer the 
question by looking at the resources that are being committed to 
improving Squeak, i.e., summarize what people actually work on and try 
to project where this will get us.

> My own Squeak direction is described in 
> http://www.jvuletich.org/Cuis/Index.html . As it seems to be 
> incompatible with that of many in the community, it requires a fork.

I don't think that the goals are incompatible. With more work on 
modularity, I think that your goals can be a subset of those in the 
larger community (just as my goals are a subset of those).

> Aside from that, I fully support your direction, and I'll try to keep 
> helping. Of course, I'd be delighted if at least some of my objectives 
> were adopted for Squeak too.

Absolutely. I agree with a lot of what you're writing. I have some 
different ideas in various areas but on a fundamental level I think we 
have fairly compatible ideas.

Cheers,
   - Andreas