Just a note to say that nearly all the changes that have been  
introduced in squeak recently 3.8, 3.9
are not in the pink pane, but in making squeak a better system to  
build other system.

Stef

On 5 oct. 05, at 19:51, Simon Michael wrote:

> Cees De Groot wrote:
>
>> Because 15-20 years ago, when Smalltalk was pushed by large  
>> companies,
>> it attracted a lot of untrained logo spinners and gave Smalltalk an
>> undeserved bad reputation.
>>
>
> Back then, Smalltalk was also owned by the large companies. Now  
> there is a significant open-source version, so it's not the same  
> situation.
>
> I agree with some points on both sides. A stronger stable/pink- 
> plane side to Squeak, and consequent greater acceptance and larger  
> user/developer/writer/business pool is needed, and despite the  
> challenges it will bring, also brings benefits for everyone, blue- 
> plane developers included. Obviously it has to happen in ways that  
> don't slow down the innovators one bit. But we've discussed this  
> before.
>
> How and where to apply money to the project I think deserves  
> separate and thorough discussion, because funding applied in the  
> wrong way can easily fragment, befuddle and significantly set back  
> a community. We should try to identify and create ways in which we  
> can use it safely. As we continue to organize ourselves these will  
> tend to become clearer.
>
>
>