Croquet has always been available - we simply didn't run around and
advertise the location. The reason this is that in doing our work we had to
break lots of code in lots of places (and by lots I mean LOTS!!!) and the
line of development simply hasn't stabilized enough yet for people to be
able to work with it.

Also, we broke these places because we are in the transition to a
fundamentally changed model. The old code, the old examples are
fundamentally flawed for the new model but giving it to people means
teaching people this fundamentally flawed model. It's just a really bad
idea.

Hope this explains matters a little.

Cheers,
  - Andreas

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jecel Assumpcao Jr" <jecel at merlintec.com>
To: <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2004 7:51 PM
Subject: Re: croquet - closed for open "business" ?


> On Friday 13 February 2004 14:41, you wrote:
> > I don't agree with you Jecel,
>
> Oh, that wasn't my opinion but my guess about the possible motivations
> of the Croquet group. Personally, I would be glad to have Croquet,
> Scratch and other fun Squeak projects developed in a more open fashion.
>
> In fact, I have made a special effort to release any code or information
> in my projects as soon as I have them myself (except for stuff owned by
> others which won't be released at all).
>
> Others prefer to work in secret and surprise us with the final product.
> Or are just afraid that work will halt and they will have to deal with
> "it complains about xzio.h not found in my system, please help" all day
> long. Check out the early 2003 part of the Croquet list if you don't
> think that could be a serious problem.
>
> Anyway, we actually agree but the opinions that matter are those of the
> OpenCroquet group.
>
> > I've already helped with Croquet,
> > before it was made 2 years ago. As I said "viewpoints".
>
> I doubt they read my 1991 paper about 3D GUIs
> (http://www.lsi.usp.br/~jecel/jpaper8.html), so I can hardly claim the
> same.
>
> > And I stand
> > by having working components;) Do you not like to have working
> > components? ;) Perhaps the people want to read that kind of email.
>
> I just thought it funny that in one email you were complaining (and
> understandably so) about unfinished projects being released and in
> another about unfinished projects not being released.
>
> Not only were incomplete experiments left "floating around" inside the
> official image, but also changes made things that used to work break.
> That was the cost of rapid development. But the focus since Squeak 3.4
> has been on cleaning up and fixing instead of radical new advances.
> There are lots of things that nobody is currently using, so if you find
> stuff that doesn't work please report it so that it can be either fixed
> or thrown away as the case may be. A quick scan through this list for
> emails with BFAV subject tags in them shows that people do want to read
> that kind of email.
>
> -- Jecel
>
>
>