[squeak-dev] Re: Monticello maintainer
andreas.raab at gmx.de
Wed Feb 3 06:12:02 UTC 2010
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> On 02.02.2010, at 20:19, Colin Putney wrote:
>> On 2010-02-01, at 11:56 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>> Andreas, i read about your concerns about MC and i feel like MC
>>> currently is abandonware,
>>> since its not maintained by anyone, yet it is de-facto standard tool
>>> for sharing the code in squeak universe.
>>> This situation is really bad and we need to change it.
>> Ok, I volunteer.
>> Igor's right - it's obvious that MC needs an active maintainer. I've been reluctant to step into this role because I'd rather devote my Squeaking time to MC2. So this will delay the release of MC 2.1, but may make the migration path smoother. I'll post more once I've had a chance to look at the state of the art and figure out a road map.
> I don't really have time to work on it, but having written my share of MC code, if you want to discuss anything you're welcome :) I actually found MC quite understandable, even without many comments ...
That's because you're smarter than me :-) But I'll use that opportunity
to learn more about MC and help writing meaningful comments.
More information about the Squeak-dev