Hi Guides (fellow Squeakers in the audience? ;-)
Three issues we should start moving on, IMO: 1. Process to take physical ownership of updates. * Scott/SqC - do you have any remaining agenda for 3.4a/3.2.1, to settle before handing over the "keys"? * Scott, are you interested in some role (as vaguely ;-) postulated by goran, or otherwise) under the guidance (sic) of us Guides? * If neither of the above, can you explain the current existing tools in the image for handling this and the required resources, so we can plan a clean transition?
I assume basically we'll need some public readable, Guides writeable storage space on updates.squeakfoundation.org, and a final update on both all current servers and versions that changes the urls currently in the image. Am I missing something?
2. Start planning the next release, in terms of content. * I'll start a thread on the squeak-dev list to hear what people think. I'll also outline the process for posting refactorings as I sent to you guys on the internal "Re: Fwd: Re: Image factoring" thread, and see what people think. * Doug, we need to know what's currently on the table of the former Harvesters group, so we can decide what to integrate, what to reject, and what to punt to the list and SM. * If you guys have directions you want the image to take in the near term beyond what I summarized as "removing constraints", like a merge plan to VI4, or whatever, I think now would be a good time to mention it. * After we get some inputs from all these sources, I suggest we hash out a basic release road map. As an initial sketch of it's shape (we'll have actual content later) - 3.4 - a quicky release to remove some constraints and test our process for refactoring and removing a few obvious applications from Squeak. 3.5 - a slightly longer release to optimize and continue the process, stabilize our work tools. 4.0 - New image format...
3. VI4/Jitter. Tim, you've mentioned a few times on the list that some VI4 changes may be incompatible with J5. I'm getting those too-familiar, unpleasent "we're not communicating and may be heading for some bad feelings" vibes. Could you, Ian, and Anthony talk business, hash it out and give us some nice bright future for this? I think the transition to VI4 will still need quite a bit of work, and J5 compatibility is the major risk I see, it would be nice to know what we're doing about it.
Daniel
Hi daniel, Guides and Scott
Three issues we should start moving on, IMO:
- Process to take physical ownership of updates.
- Scott/SqC - do you have any remaining agenda for 3.4a/3.2.1, to
settle before handing over the "keys"?
- Scott, are you interested in some role (as vaguely ;-) postulated by
goran, or otherwise) under the guidance (sic) of us Guides?
I hope Scott is willing to continue his work there. I think that there is a lot of space for people like him or Dan that knows the system so well.
Scott what is your view on that?
- If neither of the above, can you explain the current existing tools
in the image for handling this and the required resources, so we can plan a clean transition?
I assume basically we'll need some public readable, Guides writeable storage space on updates.squeakfoundation.org, and a final update on both all current servers and versions that changes the urls currently in the image. Am I missing something?
- Start planning the next release, in terms of content.
- I'll start a thread on the squeak-dev list to hear what people
think. I'll also outline the process for posting refactorings as I sent to you guys on the internal "Re: Fwd: Re: Image factoring" thread, and see what people think.
- Doug, we need to know what's currently on the table of the former
Harvesters group, so we can decide what to integrate, what to reject, and what to punt to the list and SM.
- If you guys have directions you want the image to take in the near
term beyond what I summarized as "removing constraints", like a merge plan to VI4, or whatever, I think now would be a good time to mention it.
- After we get some inputs from all these sources, I suggest we hash
out a basic release road map. As an initial sketch of it's shape (we'll have actual content later) - 3.4 - a quicky release to remove some constraints and test our process for refactoring and removing a few obvious applications from Squeak. 3.5 - a slightly longer release to optimize and continue the process, stabilize our work tools. 4.0 - New image format...
- VI4/Jitter. Tim, you've mentioned a few times on the list that some
VI4 changes may be incompatible with J5. I'm getting those too-familiar, unpleasent "we're not communicating and may be heading for some bad feelings" vibes. Could you, Ian, and Anthony talk business, hash it out and give us some nice bright future for this? I think the transition to VI4 will still need quite a bit of work, and J5 compatibility is the major risk I see, it would be nice to know what we're doing about it.
Daniel _______________________________________________ Squeakfoundation mailing list Squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation
Dr. Stéphane DUCASSE (ducasse@iam.unibe.ch) http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~ducasse/ "if you knew today was your last day on earth, what would you do different? ... especially if, by doing something different, today might not be your last day on earth" Calvin&Hobbes
On Thursday 14 November 2002 12:03 pm, danielv@netvision.net.il wrote:
- Doug, we need to know what's currently on the table of the
former Harvesters group, so we can decide what to integrate, what to reject, and what to punt to the list and SM.
It looks like we may be able to get some volunteer help with fixing bugs, removing packages, etc.
Could we perhaps prioritize:
* desired additions (probably SM-related, etc. tools for dealing with the new shape of the image)
* desired removals from the image
* tests needing to be written and/or tested
* persistent bugs that are getting in our way and need to be fixed (like, for instance, the FileDirectory problems that have crept in with 3.4 and have existed with relative paths in MacOS for some time).
Given a list, we can start signing people up for various tasks...
Ok, guys, everything sounds nice.
I hope Scott is interested and willing to stay as the main "gate keeper" for a while - but it is of course important to document the process so that we can both let someone else fill in if needed and also remake the whole harvesting process given the outlined vision of an interactive tool.
But let me skip the details for just one more post. I think it would be good to do these two steps FIRST:
1. Rework the Squeakfoundation Swiki. Rip oup the old cruft, put in some fresh info - the Mission statement etc. I can start doing this if we agree on it. 2. Put up a page there with the current Guides and their *roles*. I can do that too - but you need to help me formulate them, see below.
This last part became quite obvious when I was writing about the near future in the mission statement. Now I will throw out some roles and see what you say:
1. Guide of VMs and image format: Tim Rowledge. Coordinate the VMs, the BC stuff, J5 etc. Tim has the deep knowledge to do this and he is one of he four horseme... ehrm, I mean VM port maintainers.
2. Guide of image detanglement (dependency analysis and making the base package friendly): Daniel Vainsencher. Daniel has tools brewing (Spaghetti tracer), a bunch of good ideas how to make the image more dynamic and package friendly etc. I think you would fit perfectly in that role leading the forces forward and handing out responsibility areas. Much like you just started to do in previous postings here.
3. Guide of SM: Me. I will simply focus on moving SM forward, first step will be to present the roadmap ahead. Then if people are interested to help out I will coordinate that.
4. Guide of the update stream: I think Doug is the perfect fit. Having been a harvester Doug knows the ropes and could start by documenting the process we have together with Scott and then perhaps start sketching on a new system for this as we have envisioned. I would like to participate in the design because SM has quite a lot to do with that. Best would be if Scott wants to continue doing the updates of course but with assistance of Doug and perhaps we could also start a more aggressive collection into our alpha version - it is after all alpha, right? There are literally TONS of fixes out there. And the focus should be on fixes, not extra stuff.
5. Guide of (top down) application breakout: Ned Konz. Ned has deep Morphic knowledge which seems to come handy when ripping out a few apps from the image! Also given SAR and good knowledge of SM Ned could see to that we hand out apps to people willing to take them on and help them break them out and start maintaining them.
6. Guide of (bottom up) kernel image buildup: Craig Latta. Craig has low level knowledge and an interest in small platforms. Perhaps this is a perfect fit with Dan Ingalls/Andreas Raab to help us get that small kernel image and also start layering packages on top of it.
Note that I just whipped these up from thin air - pick, choose, reject and select according to your own!
regards, Göran
On Thursday 14 November 2002 02:07 pm, goran.hultgren@bluefish.se wrote:
- Guide of image detanglement (dependency analysis and making the
base package friendly): Daniel Vainsencher. Daniel has tools brewing (Spaghetti tracer), a bunch of good ideas how to make the image more dynamic and package friendly etc. I think you would fit perfectly in that role leading the forces forward and handing out responsibility areas. Much like you just started to do in previous postings here.
- Guide of (top down) application breakout: Ned Konz. Ned has deep
Morphic knowledge which seems to come handy when ripping out a few apps from the image! Also given SAR and good knowledge of SM Ned could see to that we hand out apps to people willing to take them on and help them break them out and start maintaining them.
- Guide of (bottom up) kernel image buildup: Craig Latta. Craig
has low level knowledge and an interest in small platforms. Perhaps this is a perfect fit with Dan Ingalls/Andreas Raab to help us get that small kernel image and also start layering packages on top of it.
These seem pretty well tangled up together.
There's some more roles outside the technical issues that relate to Values #1 (encourage participation by Squeakers of all levels) and #3 (grow the Squeak community and increase its visibility).
7. Guide of community organization. We need someone to coordinate the various efforts in the Squeak community so that we can involve as many people as possible. We've mentioned a number of ways this can happen, but it needs some kind of visible structure so people can volunteer to do things.
8. Guide of external relations. We need someone to announce releases to the outside world, prepare press releases, make sure that Squeak is listed and current on the various software catalogs (not necessarily do this themselves, but make sure it gets done), etc.
Ned Konz ned@bike-nomad.com said:
- Guide of community organization. We need someone to coordinate the=20
various efforts in the Squeak community so that we can involve as=20 many people as possible. We've mentioned a number of ways this can=20 happen, but it needs some kind of visible structure so people can=20 volunteer to do things.
- Guide of external relations. We need someone to announce releases=20
to the outside world, prepare press releases, make sure that Squeak=20 is listed and current on the various software catalogs (not=20 necessarily do this themselves, but make sure it gets done), etc.
Dunnow whether you want more Guides or not, but I'm prepared to sign up for this (certainly the first, but I'll be happy to take both).
Hi all!
cg@cdegroot.com (Cees de Groot) wrote:
Ned Konz ned@bike-nomad.com said:
- Guide of community organization. We need someone to coordinate the=20
various efforts in the Squeak community so that we can involve as=20 many people as possible. We've mentioned a number of ways this can=20 happen, but it needs some kind of visible structure so people can=20 volunteer to do things.
- Guide of external relations. We need someone to announce releases=20
to the outside world, prepare press releases, make sure that Squeak=20 is listed and current on the various software catalogs (not=20 necessarily do this themselves, but make sure it gets done), etc.
Dunnow whether you want more Guides or not, but I'm prepared to sign up for this (certainly the first, but I'll be happy to take both).
Yes, I was also thinking along these lines. Now when/if we are taking this role-based approach, which I think would be very good (opinions?), we can probably handle one or two more Guides. Cees is running some infrastructure, has good connections with other communities and has IMHO proven earlier quite well that he is committed to the "task".
Btw - sorry for my wording "cruft" about SqF swiki - wasn't implying that the stuff there was bad in any way - when going in I will of course not "trash" anything, just move around a bit perhaps.
Or... if the others are ok with you joining us (which I assume) and you pick 7&8 above then perhaps you could do te reorg of the Swiki, put the mission statement up there and start nailing down the "role" table.
Typically we could also at the same page record other responsibilities held by other people than the Guides.
How does this sound?
regards, Göran
goran.hultgren@bluefish.se said:
How does this sound?
Fine with me, but I'll wait for the others to give their say before rushing in (besides, I'm supposed to run my business at this time ;-))
On Friday 15 November 2002 01:58 am, goran.hultgren@bluefish.se wrote:
Or... if the others are ok with you joining us (which I assume) and you pick 7&8 above then perhaps you could do te reorg of the Swiki, put the mission statement up there and start nailing down the "role" table.
Fine with me! Cees would be a welcome addition.
On Thursday, November 14, 2002, at 05:07 PM, goran.hultgren@bluefish.se wrote:
- Rework the Squeakfoundation Swiki. Rip oup the old cruft, put in some
fresh info - the Mission statement etc. I can start doing this if we agree on it.
Yes. You might keep the old SqF intro page around for historical purposes, but move/rename it and mark it as obsolete.
- Put up a page there with the current Guides and their *roles*. I can
do that too - but you need to help me formulate them, see below.
... 4. Guide of the update stream: I think Doug is the perfect fit. Having been a harvester Doug knows the ropes and could start by documenting the process we have together with Scott and then perhaps start sketching on a new system for this as we have envisioned. I would like to participate in the design because SM has quite a lot to do with that. Best would be if Scott wants to continue doing the updates of course but with assistance of Doug and perhaps we could also start a more aggressive collection into our alpha version - it is after all alpha, right? There are literally TONS of fixes out there. And the focus should be on fixes, not extra stuff.
Sounds good, you can put me down for that role. See my reply to Daniel about how to handle the current load of fixes. Also, we'll have to figure out how much time to spend on collecting fixes versus working on a new harvesting system (which could help quite a bit).
- Doug
goran.hultgren@bluefish.se said:
- Rework the Squeakfoundation Swiki. Rip oup the old cruft, put in some
fresh info - the Mission statement etc. I can start doing this if we agree on it.
Of course you're more than welcome to rework the Swiki in any manner you see fit, but a) I'd appreciate it if you would leave the 'old cruft' at least accessible, and b) I think we still want that official foundation, so AFAIC this is still on track (postponed, probably, until everyone gets some breathing room which will probably after the economy recuperates).
Note that I just whipped these up from thin air - pick, choose, reject and select according to your own!
Well, in that case I must admire your wipping skills ;-)
On Thursday, November 14, 2002, at 03:03 PM, danielv@netvision.net.il wrote:
Hi Guides (fellow Squeakers in the audience? ;-)
Three issues we should start moving on, IMO:
- Process to take physical ownership of updates.
- Scott/SqC - do you have any remaining agenda for 3.4a/3.2.1, to
settle before handing over the "keys"?
- Scott, are you interested in some role (as vaguely ;-) postulated by
goran, or otherwise) under the guidance (sic) of us Guides?
- If neither of the above, can you explain the current existing tools
in the image for handling this and the required resources, so we can plan a clean transition?
I assume basically we'll need some public readable, Guides writeable storage space on updates.squeakfoundation.org, and a final update on both all current servers and versions that changes the urls currently in the image. Am I missing something?
This sounds like the right idea. I can contact Scott about this if he doesn't respond soon, I'm not sure if he's following this list yet (or keeping up with the torrent of emails & squeak-dev postings :-) ).
- Start planning the next release, in terms of content.
- I'll start a thread on the squeak-dev list to hear what people think.
I'll also outline the process for posting refactorings as I sent to you guys on the internal "Re: Fwd: Re: Image factoring" thread, and see what people think.
- Doug, we need to know what's currently on the table of the former
Harvesters group, so we can decide what to integrate, what to reject, and what to punt to the list and SM.
Well, there were two bundles of fixes harvested by myself and Luciano about six months ago, which fell off the table somehow before making it into the 3.3alpha update stream. These were mostly useful fixes & refactorings. I could look at (non-module) retrofitting these to 3.4alpha. There haven't been all *that* many updates in the last six months (which would potentially conflict), so this may not be too hard.
Other than that, there's the usual swarm of fixes/enhancements submitted to the list over the last 6 months which still haven't been harvested, or even put "on the table" (in the sqfixes harvesting tables). (Adding items to the sqfixes is only a semi-automatic process right now, which is something in the process that we can definitely improve.)
I guess I need to think about whether to generate tables for the list submissions over the last 6 months, or whether to just issue a call to the list to re-submit items which people think are important.
- If you guys have directions you want the image to take in the near
term beyond what I summarized as "removing constraints", like a merge plan to VI4, or whatever, I think now would be a good time to mention it.
- After we get some inputs from all these sources, I suggest we hash
out a basic release road map. As an initial sketch of it's shape (we'll have actual content later) - 3.4 - a quicky release to remove some constraints and test our process for refactoring and removing a few obvious applications from Squeak. 3.5 - a slightly longer release to optimize and continue the process, stabilize our work tools. 4.0 - New image format...
This sounds pretty good, at least for 3.4 and 3.5. (I'll let others comment on 4.0.)
- Doug
Doug Way wrote:
Well, there were two bundles of fixes harvested by myself and Luciano about six months ago, which fell off the table somehow before making it into the 3.3alpha update stream. [...] I guess I need to think about whether to generate tables for the list submissions over the last 6 months, or whether to just issue a call to the list to re-submit items which people think are important.
Hi all, I'm excited about all the news, and I'm happy to see Squeak taking some impulse again. I'm sorry I haven't had a chance to do much harvesting lately but, if it's allright with everybody, I intend to continue my role as a harvester. Let me know when the new tables are up, so I can start reviewing the submissions.
Peace, Luciano.-
On Friday, November 15, 2002, at 02:55 PM, Luciano Notarfrancesco wrote:
Doug Way wrote:
Well, there were two bundles of fixes harvested by myself and Luciano about six months ago, which fell off the table somehow before making it into the 3.3alpha update stream. [...] I guess I need to think about whether to generate tables for the list submissions over the last 6 months, or whether to just issue a call to the list to re-submit items which people think are important.
Hi all, I'm excited about all the news, and I'm happy to see Squeak taking some impulse again. I'm sorry I haven't had a chance to do much harvesting lately but, if it's allright with everybody, I intend to continue my role as a harvester. Let me know when the new tables are up, so I can start reviewing the submissions.
Hi Luciano.
It would be great if you want to continue on as a harvester. We will still need a group of harvesters oustide of the current Guides. The Guides may do a little bit a harvesting too, but they have enough other stuff to worry about without trying to do all the harvesting.
Eventually, as the image is split up into packages, the harvesting process will become more package-specific, but until that time (and possibly even after), we'll probably need a coordinated group of harvesters.
For now, feel free to follow the discussions on the SqF list... we'll continue to discuss how the harvesting process can be improved.
- Doug
squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
cg＠cdegroot.com -
danielv＠netvision.net.il -
Doug Way -
goran.hultgren＠bluefish.se -
Luciano Notarfrancesco -
Ned Konz -
Stephane Ducasse