On Fri, 02 Sep 2005 22:26:23 -0700, Victor Rodriguez  
<victor.palique at gmail.com> wrote:
[stuff about Squeak's accessibility]

I'm not going to disagree with you, exactly, because I think your  
perceptions are mostly correct. Although, I would say that light fooling  
around in Squeak is pretty easy. There are lots of beginner's documents,  
there is Etoys, etc. Making the jump from apprentice to master--or even  
Journeyman, for that matter, is much, much harder. Squeak is a lot of big  
bites (even Etoys is a big bite if you hope to understand the system in  
the Smalltalk sense). I have actually found this to be true of Smalltalk  
since I started with it (over ten years ago!).

But look: Stéphane Ducasse responded to you. He's working on traits, he's  
involved in the site redesign, he's authored a book based on Squeak that  
people are clamoring for a sequel to (waves at Stéphane :-))--should he do  
it? Looking at the people who are best qualified to explain what's going  
on and they've all got full plates.

Which leaves stuff like that to thee and me. Personally, I'm still  
studying. (I'm writing stuff, too, but nothing I'm ready for others to  
read, yet.)

To add to the confusion, Squeak's a moving target: We have traits, Tweak,  
Spoon and Croquet all in the offing, just to name a few.

But I don't think anything's going to get done to make these things  
clearer as long as the burden for explaining stuff is all on the shoulders  
of the same people whose job it is to move things forward. (The psychology  
is wrong, for one thing: Where you or I see what is, their attention is on  
what shall be.)