[Squeakfoundation]Taking control of parts of Squeak

[goran.hultgren at bluefish.se]

Hi all!

Colin Putney <cputney at whistler.com> wrote:
> On Monday, February 24, 2003, at 05:17  AM, goran.hultgren at bluefish.se 
> wrote:
> 
> > So... unless there are many more "strongly against" :-) then I would
> > like us to work out some form of "rules" for these core package
> > maintainers. This is essentially what Roel was describing.
> 
> I'm all for entrusting the Berne fellows with maintainership of the 
> Squeak kernel. They're the perfect candidates, actually, since they 
> have an itch to scratch.
> 
> However, I don't know that we need to have a big rules discussion. 
> There seems to be a certain level of comfort in the community with the 
> idea, and as long as the development of the kernel happens out in the 
> open, it'll become clear rather quickly what works, what doesn't and 
> what's problematic.
> 
> We're a small enough community that we don't have to be overly 
> concerned with rules, so much as establishing conventions for 
> distributed maintainership of Squeak. In fact, I bet that no matter 

I agree we don't need a lot of rules. I think I essentially was thinking
about what you call "establishing conventions for distributed
maintainership". Actually.

Other "rules" like in fact much what Roel mentioned could be up to the
maintainership in fact. At least to start with. Eventually, especially
when we have better tools like the Harvesting tool, we may perhaps try o
streamline but until then I agree - let the maintainership work as they
see fit for the packages they tend.

Of course, at the same time, it does feel reassuring to hear how SCG
intend to work.

regards, Göran