Hi fellow Guides!
When I just wrote the "monthly status report" I realized that we haven't really decided about "giving" SCG the Stewardship of the kernel. Of course, we guides are by no means "dictators" but we do have a responsibility to move discussions into decisions and after reading through this thread (the post from Alexandre Bergel felt like the "official request" from SCG) it looks to me that everyone is in favour of this arrangement.
So someone needs to "hit the club in the desk", or whatever you call it.
We talked a bit about what being a Steward means and we more or less came to the conclusion that we don't want to set any rules at this point. It is better to move ahead and learn. The only "guideline" that Andreas mentioned would be that as a Steward you simply need to be "more careful" when evolving the package - you obviously have much more dependents maintaining something in the kernel.
What we all wanted was some form of charter from SCG what they plan etc but I think we have a pretty good picture already and it probably will not affect the decision here - which is more a question of trust in their capability and motives. :-)
So, just to move forward one step:
Can we Guides agree to give SCG this Stewardship? I vote yes.
Let us all (us Guides that is) reply to this post so that we get a full count (6) and then we can make it "official", unless of course someone is against or still have things to discuss in which case we will just have to discuss further.
regards, Göran
On Tuesday 11 March 2003 02:03 am, goran.hultgren@bluefish.se wrote:
Can we Guides agree to give SCG this Stewardship? I vote yes.
I vote yes too.
Hi Göran--
...someone needs to "hit the club in the desk", or whatever you call it.
Heh; that would be "bang the gavel". :)
I abstain.
-C
-- Craig Latta improvisational musical informaticist craig@netjam.org www.netjam.org/resume Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)]
I vote yes.
I was going to mention a minor concern about it being somewhat early to decide this, because the kernel might be the last piece to be separated from the rest of the image, which probably won't be for a while. But this is an important responsibility, so figuring out something well ahead of time is probably a good idea. And of course some improvements could be made to the kernel before it is separated from the image, and the steward would also help decide what exactly makes up the kernel, and how to separate it.
- Doug Way
On Tuesday, March 11, 2003, at 05:03 AM, goran.hultgren@bluefish.se wrote:
Hi fellow Guides!
When I just wrote the "monthly status report" I realized that we haven't really decided about "giving" SCG the Stewardship of the kernel. Of course, we guides are by no means "dictators" but we do have a responsibility to move discussions into decisions and after reading through this thread (the post from Alexandre Bergel felt like the "official request" from SCG) it looks to me that everyone is in favour of this arrangement.
So someone needs to "hit the club in the desk", or whatever you call it.
We talked a bit about what being a Steward means and we more or less came to the conclusion that we don't want to set any rules at this point. It is better to move ahead and learn. The only "guideline" that Andreas mentioned would be that as a Steward you simply need to be "more careful" when evolving the package - you obviously have much more dependents maintaining something in the kernel.
What we all wanted was some form of charter from SCG what they plan etc but I think we have a pretty good picture already and it probably will not affect the decision here - which is more a question of trust in their capability and motives. :-)
So, just to move forward one step:
Can we Guides agree to give SCG this Stewardship? I vote yes.
Let us all (us Guides that is) reply to this post so that we get a full count (6) and then we can make it "official", unless of course someone is against or still have things to discuss in which case we will just have to discuss further.
regards, Göran
Squeakfoundation mailing list Squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation
squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Craig Latta -
Doug Way -
goran.hultgren＠bluefish.se -
Ned Konz