Goran,
   Thank you for this; you have gone a LONG way in answering my questions.
BTW I have read this email and no others in the very long thread as I didn't
want to 'taint' my viewpoint after reading yours.

I think there has been great misunderstanding, I have no idea if it is on
your or my part or both. I have reread your email and I have to say I still
see this as "your views will be overruled if it suits our purposes" BUT I
could be wrong. It happens often! :)

Ah I know what the issue is; there are contradictions in what you are saying
now and previous emails by you, others in the islands group and other in
influence. Well maybe not contradictions, maybe because of the fact that
there is no place that describes the feature list that will go into the next
release of Squeak or in fact the goals of the next release. When I read the
list, I see Namespaces, Traits, Spoon and several others as accepted goals
for Squeak in the next few releases. This is coming from people I associated
with being Guides and therefore keepers of the sacred destiny. So I believe
that, maybe I shouldn't. 

If you have read my emails lately, I have point blank suggested that the
guides SHOULD be guiding. There is a difference between guiding and
benevolent dictatorships however. What is the process if a large proportion
of the community disagree with the islands group? In fact where are any of
the processes we really need? Everyone talks about Debian and packaging,
they have RULES, and we do not. Fix that and you have got me backing you up
100%.

Hmmmm I have read and reread your statement. I have written and re-written
several extensions to this email. Frankly I am tired and I don’t think there
is anything I can say that will change or divert this occurrence. So I will
bow out and let whatever happens, happen. Maybe I am just being negative ;)
All I will say is PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE be inclusive of this community, there
are a LOT of people making good suggestions that are not being acknowledged
by the "in" crowd (and yes I strongly believe there is one). 
Oh for those who maybe don't have English as a first language, an "in" crowd
is a clique with influence, you know that group of popular kids at school
who made it hell for us nerds :)

Russell
"You can't write Open Source with a closed mind"

> -----Original Message-----
> From: goran.krampe at bluefish.se [mailto:goran.krampe at bluefish.se]
> Sent: Wednesday, 16 February 2005 5:46 PM
> To: russell.penney at tincanct.com; The general-purpose Squeak developers
> list
> Subject: RE: [ANN][IMPORTANT] New leadership formed!
> 
> Hi Russell and all!
> 
> I am replying a bit out of order here, taking the shorter ones first.
> 
> NOTE: Btw, this is ME talking, not on behalf of the others - but I am
> quite sure they agree with what I am saying. And we aren't suddenly
> going to talk with one voice - we are still a part of this community as
> individuals, just like the rest of you.
> 
> "Russell Penney" <russell.penney at tincanct.com> wrote:
> > I have to back Lex's comments completely on this one. These are the sort
> of
> > things that REALLY make me think seriously about just forgetting about
> > Squeak and moving on.
> 
> I will reply to Lex post shortly.
> 
> > I am sorry if this sounds harsh, but I feel we are now going to have the
> > "in" crowds ideas forced into Squeak whether we like it or not.
> Namespaces
> > here we come.
> 
> No, no, no.... "in" crowd? What is that?
> 
> And regarding namespaces - absolutely not You are implying that the
> decision process would be radically different now - that we would "push"
> things onto the community like tyrants. That is not how it works - the
> community would kick us in the butt if we pulled any stunts like that.
> In fact, I think it is the direct opposite - now with this
> responsibility we will take extra care because we really don't want to
> fail your trust. Well, I am still hoping that we will earn your trust.
> 
> So things are going to continue very, very much like before in a totally
> open fashion discussing things on this list - but hopefully with the
> difference that issues *do* come to conclusions and that things are
> followed up properly and either get done or get cancelled.
> 
> Anyone thinking that we are doing this for some kind of power trip
> hasn't read what I wrote carefully, or I really failed in communicating
> what this is. This is bloody painful people, not some fun power trip. ;)
> (I gotta throw in some humour, to lighten this up a bit)
> 
> Lots of people have been complaining over the years for a lack of "real"
> leadership. I was the one that came up with the Guides idea in the
> beginning, and it was my way of handling the task I was given by SqC
> (yes, at OOPSLA waaay back) - the task of getting some kind of "board"
> together for taking over after SqC stepping back. At that time I felt
> that taking over the leadership in a more decisive way, like we are
> doing now, wasn't going to work. And I still think that was the case.
> 
> Now, after a few years we feel that it is high time to take more
> responsibility. And that is what this is about - taking more
> responsibility.
> 
> I am *intent* on explaining this over and over and in as much detail as
> you like - we really, really are committed to this - to get the Squeak
> community better organized. That is what this is about.
> 
> > Quite frankly if more effort was put into fixing things rather
> > than forcing language changes to suit a small group, Squeak would be
> much
> > better off!
> 
> Noone is forcing language changes onto anyone. Just because I have
> happened to discuss my namespace/prefix implementation in parallell with
> what has been going on, doesn't mean anything at all. In fact, the
> *only* reason it came up was because Steph said he didn't like it (in
> some context I can't remember) and I wanted to know why.
> 
> I repeat, repeat, repeat, and please do believe me on this one: We are
> not introducing ANY namespace solution in any near time. This has been
> said repeatedly, and by Doug also. Please hear me on that one, ok? :)
> 
> And for other changes - sure, Squeak evolves, but in the open
> cooperative manner that we all want I dare say. AFAIK there are no big
> language changes (or any other changes that haven't already been
> discussed on this list prior to this) that are being planned. There is
> NO hidden agenda. Ok?
> 
> > How about running a poll to see how many people actually support this
> > endeavour of yours? My guess is very few but of course tyrants don't
> need
> > polls, do they?
> 
> Sure, we can run a poll - anyone is free to do that. I just want to
> remind you that the people in this group are people doing lots and lots
> for Squeak and have been doing so for a long time. We aren't talking
> about a few people just jumping into this.
> 
> We feel it is time that someone takes charge. And this is an *interim*
> solution until SqF formation gets its stuff in place. Let me repeat
> that: This is an *interim* solution.
> 
> > Very annoyed
> > Russell
> 
> I really hope I am answering your concerns (and others) and that you
> will reconsider and perhaps read the ANNouncement once again. This is
> not some hostile power trip. We are doing this because we think it is a
> good thing to do. We need a decision body, that is it.
> 
> I will gladly answer private email or keep on replying until all your
> questions are answered.
> 
> regards, Göran