The future of SM...

Craig Latta craig at netjam.org
Fri Jul 16 10:36:51 UTC 2004


Hi all--

	I've spoken with Göran individually, and it seems there are no hard
feelings (certainly not on my part). However, for the record, I do think
it was inappropriate of him to excerpt our IRC conversation here (he has
since apologized). I think this because he left out a bunch of important
context, and (in my opinion) misrepresented my position. In particular,
he omitted my statements regarding the vitality of SqueakMap for our
current efforts, and what I meant by "transitional". I encourage people
to read the actual transcript, despite its length.

	When I say "transitional", I mean that, in my view, SqueakMap's main
value is in helping us discover how to group the content of the system
into packages, but there are better ways to represent and distribute
those packages. In the IRC conversation, I describe SqueakMap as a
vehicle, which helps us get from the traditional chaotic and intertwined
"kitchen sink" to a state where we have a better idea of what the
logical component groupings are. That we reach our destination does not
mean that the vehicle is worthless, just that it has served its purpose.
Indeed, I think that without SqueakMap, we almost certainly would not
have made the considerable progress we have since OOPSLA 2002. I think
Göran's work is very important, and have never thought otherwise.

	Another important omission: I explained that reflection upon elements
of the packaging domain model (e.g., authors), by expressing those
elements entirely as live objects, is crucial in conducting the two-way
negotiation underlying Squat module synchronization. Also, I emphasized
that the embodiment of these concepts in the 1 alpha 8 Squat release is
indeed unfinished, but is (I think) an important illustration of the
possibilities nevertheless.

	I would also like to make it clear that I never suggested Göran stop
working on SqueakMap. Also, last night's conversation was solicited by
Göran. He asked my opinion and I gave it.

	Phil Hargett writes:

> ...to anyone who wishes to criticize SqueakMap and / or Goran's 
> contributions, I say to you: bring it on.

	This seems needlessly confrontational to me. If, after reviewing what
I've said (and not just a partial secondhand account), you think my
criticisms have been unconstructive, please say so.

> Feel free to contribute in just the same fashion: that is,
> delivering good code, developing a consensus around a vision, and
> coaching others how to move Squeak forward in a coordinated fashion.

	The implication here seems to be that I am not contributing in the same
fashion. I can only point out that my code has been available since the
first release in February 2004, there has been a public project mailing
list since February 2003, I have made myself available on the Squeak
channel for at least that long, and I have invited discussion about
future directions and desires (in the aforementioned venues as well as
this list) for over a year. Perhaps most importantly, there is a very
large amount to design and write, and some conversations need working
software in order to be meaningful. I don't think characterizing my
activity as "writing code in a corner" is fair.

	Come on over to the Squeak channel. :)


	thanks,

-C

--
Craig Latta
improvisational musical informaticist
craig at netjam.org
www.netjam.org
[|] Proceed for Truth!




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list