Against wastefull forks (Re: Taking Ownership of Squeak (WAS Re: Python at Disney))

Dan Shafer dshafer at yahoo.com
Fri Mar 9 21:31:34 UTC 2001


Florin....

Thanks for the injection of humor. I laughed out loud and I needed that today!
--- Florin X Mateoc <mateoc_florin at jpmorgan.com> wrote:
> I think that the opensource vm and the very portable approach/implementation
> are
> very strong attractions in themselves for people who want to do
> industrial-strength Smalltalk or other non-multimedia things. You don't find
> these in other dialects AFAIK.
> It is entirely Squeak's fault that it simultaneously offers a very valuable
> base
> to different groups of people who want to take it in different directions.
> I personally think it should be punished
> 
> Florin
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> bob at bobjectsinc.com on 03/09/2001 03:32:58 PM
> 
> Please respond to squeak at cs.uiuc.edu
> 
> To:   squeak at cs.uiuc.edu
> cc:   (bcc: Florin X Mateoc)
> Subject:  Re: Against wastefull forks (Re: Taking Ownership of Squeak  (WAS
> Re:
>       Python at Disney))
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would normally agree with this, but I think Squeak is a special case.
> You can't effectively do blue-plane research without occasionally burning
> some disk-packs, and you can't effectively do robust 24x7
> industrial-strength apps when the platform keeps shifting and breaking
> under your feet.  Both approaches to development are valid, but difficult
> to reconcile.
> 
> On the other hand, it could be argued that if you want to do
> industrial-strength Smalltalk in early 2001, you should use a different
> dialect.  Opinions?
> 
>      -Bob
> 
> 
> At 09:00 PM 3/9/2001 +0100, you wrote:
> >> it seems to me that we need to draw a line, fork
> >> Squeak (I don't know if 3.0 or 3.1 is the right one to
> >> fork with yet) and create a Red Hat kind of company
> >> that will caretake the product, referee and
> >> manage releases, and become the repository Disney
> >> has been for the last several years.
> >
> >I disagree.
> >
> >I am currently reading Eric S. Raymond's The Cathedral and the Bazar. There
> >are a few paragraphs in the chapter Homesteading the Noosphere on pages
> >72-73 regarding forks and pseudo-forks which I think are valid. There
> >usually is (and should be as far as I am concerned) "a strong social
> >pressure against forking projects".
> >
> >I do not see a "plea of dire necessity" to fork the Squeak project. When did
> >SqC object to submissions of Smalltalk code or VM modifications which were
> >necessary to make Squeak "an industrial-strength, generic problem-solving
> >system for all of us" ? If they did not do that then new or improved code is
> >required instead of a probably wastefull project split.
> >
> >Andreas
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> This communication is for informational purposes only.  It is not intended as
> an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument
> or as an official confirmation of any transaction. All market prices, data
> and other information are not warranted as to completeness or accuracy and
> are subject to change without notice. Any comments or statements made herein
> do not necessarily reflect those of J.P. Morgan Chase & Co., its
> subsidiaries and affiliates.
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get email at your own domain with Yahoo! Mail. 
http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list