How to improve Squeak

Brad Fuller brad at sonaural.com
Sun Jul 11 20:21:55 UTC 2004


 
> On Jul 11, 2004, at 2:47 PM, Brad Fuller wrote:
> 
> > Hi all,
> >
> > What is the criteria and approval process of being in the 
> base image?
> 
> The approval process (Harvesting Process) is pretty much covered here:
> 
> http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3152
> 
> Note that there aren't really strictly defined criteria for 
> something to be allowed in the base image, other than 
> approval/review from one or more harvesters and other 
> volunteers.  However, most of the things being discussed here 
> (Squeak Server Pages, EventRecorderMorph, etc) pre-date the 
> existence of the Harvesting Process anyway. (they were added 
> earlier in the days of Squeak Central)
> 
> - Doug

Thanks Doug. I see now that the classes discussed here are before the
Harvesting Process. However, they could go back through the Harvesting
Process -- if this is the only formal process avaiable. At least they would
meet the same criteria as any new one -- and they could be thrown out if
need be.

But, in addition and more important: After reviewing this link, I don't have
to tell you experienced ones that the approval process is somewhat of a
problem from a quality standpoint. For instance, ONE harvester can "approve"
a submission to be included in the image (and, it could be his/her own
submission) -- there is no mandated peer review, or even a peer review
process for that matter. I trust that everyone intimately understands the
other issues and problems with this process.

Has a proposal been put forth in the past to improve this process? I for one
would like to see this tighter. Perhaps this is what Ramiro was pointing out
in his "Magma" email.

brad





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list