Comitees set to design horses end up implementing giraffes. Forcing anything will be paid with momentum. I don't think you want to loose it. Want to start your own movment? nobody will stop you. Go ahead fork and show results. You probably have to prioritize one of the current projects. Nothing wrong with that. Is your choice so is your problem. Nothing is going to die. Each tool is doing its job decently so why don't we stop the bullsh*t and keep it organic? I mean like less talk, more progress. On both projects. Don't you have real problems to get solved? then put your momentum there
_____
De: squeak-dev-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org [mailto:squeak-dev-bounces@lists.squeakfoundation.org] En nombre de Stephen Pair Enviado el: Monday, June 29, 2009 09:04 Para: The general-purpose Squeak developers list Asunto: Re: [squeak-dev] The future of Squeak & Pharo (was Re: [Pharo-project] [ANN] Pharo MIT license clean)
2009/6/29 Janko Mivšek janko.mivsek@eranova.si
Juan Vuletich pravi:
I don't agree with this at all. The biggest problems Cuis and Pharo are trying to fix are the endless discussions, the weak leadership and the impossibility to build consensus in fundamental decisions.
I agree completelly!
Me too. The fact is that committee and consensus based process, while it can work, will always be much slower and often unsatisfactory to a large percentage of the community (until our intellects are all intimately coupled (like the Borg), I suspect this will remain the case). I see no reason to merge squeak with pharo, cuis or eToys. These forks of squeak are successful in large part because they forked from the main squeak. They are driven by people that have a very specific vision of what they want and there happen to be other people that believe in that same vision and contribute. They don't have to seek approval or build any sort of consensus from any committee. They alone get to decide to what degree they listen to their own community.
- Stephen