Disclaimer - I hate goals and mission statements since like non-disclosure agreements the longer they are the less gets done. I think something brief and broad is preferable to a list of lists.
Encourage the development, support, distribution and evolution of Squeak and Squeak based endeavors wherever it may be os use. Ensure that Squeak is available to future generations of researchers and educators. Encourage creativity and diversity. Try to reduce unnecessary duplication of effort and increased reuse. [nice tension <g>]
I also think we should steal from something that works aka Apache rather than attempt to get caught up in meta process. It can always be changed in release 2, but if there is no release 1 who cares about release 2. We need to be realistic about how long it will take to achieve this and get started sooner rather than later.
Finally we need to realize that innovation and progress will cost something and that something means that there needs to be some diversification such as the multiple projects forking before consolidation/unification.
Dave
dave@bedarra.com said:
I also think we should steal from something that works aka Apache rather than attempt to get caught up in meta process. It can always be changed in release 2, but if there is no release 1 who cares about release 2. We need to be realistic about how long it will take to achieve this and get started sooner rather than later.
You are right, and please be this process' conscience here. The risk of getting stuck in a metaprocess is quite real (the Jini community seems to be suffering from it currently). However, I do think that there's nothing lost if we take a couple of weeks or even months to hash out these issues - as usual, there's a fine balance.
We've been talking about Squeak Foundation as the name of the organization, but Dan Ingalls mentioned the name Open Smalltalk recently on the Squeak list.
What do others think of Open Smalltalk Foundation vs. Squeak Foundation?
Or perhaps other names? Whisper, FreeTalk, FreeSpeech, BigThot, ThotLab, PureFun? I bet someone has a great name lurking in a corner of their mind.
-Mark Schwenk WellThot Inc.
"Mark A. Schwenk" mas@wellthot.com is widely believed to have written:
We've been talking about Squeak Foundation as the name of the organization, but Dan Ingalls mentioned the name Open Smalltalk recently on the Squeak list.
What do others think of Open Smalltalk Foundation vs. Squeak Foundation?
The chief problem I see with any name too far from The Squeak Foundation is the expectation raising. Open Smalltalk Foundation strongly suggests a pan-Smalltalk organisation; this is not what I understand we are intending.
tim
tim@sumeru.stanford.edu said:
Open Smalltalk Foundation strongly suggests a pan-Smalltalk organisation; this is not what I understand we are intending.
Not if Stable Squeak gets dubbed Open Smalltalk[tm].
mas@wellthot.com said:
What do others think of Open Smalltalk Foundation vs. Squeak Foundation?
Well (watch me getting obnoxious here), it would obviously depend on the goals/purpose we set ourselves. Open Smalltalk would probably convey some purposes clearer and certainly would generate more initial (press) interest, but it would also, as Tim remarks, risk that the Squeak connection become unclear. I do like the suggestion that the name is open for discussion, though.
I wanted to suggest the Pangalacticgargleblaster Foundation, but that name's been taken...
One issue with Open Smalltalk is that opensmalltalk.org/com are gone...
Dave wrote:
Encourage the development, support, distribution and evolution of Squeak and Squeak based endeavors wherever it may be os use. Ensure that Squeak is available to future generations of researchers and educators. Encourage creativity and diversity. Try to reduce unnecessary duplication of effort and increased reuse. [nice tension <g>]
That is the best one I have read so far. I updated http://swiki.cdegroot.com/squeakfoundation/6
Finally we need to realize that innovation and progress will cost something and that something means that there needs to be some diversification such as the multiple projects forking before consolidation/unification.
No complete agreement here (but I do not yet see a need to exclude forkers from SqF :-)
Andreas
squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Andreas Kuckartz -
cg＠cdegroot.com -
Dave -
Mark A. Schwenk -
Tim Rowledge