> I really think we shouldn't consider Pharo as a Squeak fork anymore :
> they have their own agenda and it's clear that compatibility (a hot
> topic on the Pharo mailing list these days) is not a concern for them.

We just had Göran telling us quite the opposite. I see no reason to 
reject "them", and even no reason to think in terms of "us" and "them". 
It looks that at the moment Squeak development includes items from many 
places, including Cuis or Spoon or Pharo or Etoys, not to mention Cog, 
so let it be. Everybody is happy within his own world, and if these 
worlds can exchange (and they should) it's only positive.

Now the issue of where to find code is a real one; in my 10+ years of 
experience with Squeak it has always been. I see this as a reflect of 
the nature of Squeak as an extraordinary playground for prototyping 
stuff. Code is wild in Squeak: both inside the image, and outside. 
That's actually why Pharo exists: to "clean-up" Squeak, as it seems the 
mess was seen as unbearable and unprofessional by some (not my point of 
view obviously).

As for me I do not dislike the messy and dynamic aspect of Squeak, and 
what I actually like very much is its still valid philosophy of "one 
person should be able to master the whole system". I see software 
development as a craftmanship of sort, and I am not inclined to use 
things like a source code management system (just don't need it). I 
don't even use Monticello. My own contribution for Squeak simply have 
entries in SqueakMap and are available from my site either as sar files 
or ready-to-go images:

http://www.zogotounga.net/comp/eindex.html

I do not intend to change anything in that regard. So at least because 
of me, you will never have all code for Squeak in one place.


Stef