Hi Göran,

>> Your magic trick with which you think you can 'avoid forking' will 
>> not change this. You said the guides duty is not to have a vision 
>> for Squeak and some guides may not be interested that much in 
>> Multimedia that they want to take on such a decision and that 
>> people should 'sell' their wish of inclusion to the guides. I think 
>> not the code of the one who _sells best_ should be included, the 
>> _best code_ or the _most needed function_ has to be chosen. 
>
>I don't think there is a difference. If a function is sorely needed it
>sells. Just playing with words.

It is a big difference, note that I didn't say _it_ sells, I said 
_someone_ sells and Daniel demanded this too. Look what happens in 
reality: Some people cry loudly about inclusion of their code, some 
others put their package quietly and humbly on SM. The quality or the 
necessity of a piece of code does NOT correlate with the 'selling 
behaviour' of their creators. I would even suggest that there may be a 
slightly negative correlation. 

If you guides even demand that people have to sell to you, your 
thoughts will swirl around what is offered most loudly and not what is 
really good code, what is really necessary, what fits into a longterm 
vision. 

>> It seems to be that Squeak lacks someone who wants to make such 
>> decisions and is able to do so. Perhaps it is not appropriate for 
>> me to make such a proposal, but after all this discussion in this 
>> list, I must say I think Andreas ( along with Doug ) should make 
>> these decisions. Of course with previous discussions with the rest 
>> of the world. 
>
>Eh, well - to just throw out two names and then think the problem is
>solved feels a little naive to me.

Andreas noticed that there are packages out there, which are of high 
quality and which functions are needed for a universal long term 
success of Squeak. He then nailed down exactly which packages he 
thinks of. This looks like he wants to take on making decisions and it 
looks like that he has a vision for Squeak. Taking into account his 
many posts I read, which always gave me the impression that he is able 
to look at things from different perspectives and generally does so, I 
think his vision is one which fits all different wishes of what Squeak 
could be and what it can be used for. 

Doug is the head of the harvesters right now and I remember that he 
expressed his joy of making such decisions in the past. 

That is why I threw in two names, I don't think that's naive. 
Conversely I must say I find it a bit naive to believe in a decision 
making process which denies that a vision is needed, what is the 
criteria for your decision than? 

All ideas of having a procedure which shift the responsibility away 
from the top to the community is in fact a decision process which 
replaces the vision with the loudest crying salesman. 

Göran, this is doomed to failure, we need someone or some few with
a clear vision, with the courage to take on such decisions and the
ability to do so. 

Regards,
    Martin