Hi Victor and all!

Victor Rodriguez <victor.palique at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hello Goran,
> 
> Thanks for your reply, it has been the most helpful information (and
> links) to know what is going on with Squeak.
> 
> 2005/9/1, goran at krampe.se <goran at krampe.se>:
> [snip]
> > Well, Squeak is very much a doer-ocracy - if you are a "doer" you *will*
> > lead in one way or another, either you like it or not. :) So in essence
> > the people who have the time and skill for the moment to put in an
> > effort are typically the ones running the show at that point in time. :)
> 
> This is very nice, and is obviously has its merit, such work as Traits
> and Exupery is very exciting. Still, without clear leadership, this
> may not be sustainable, and is definetively detrimental to attract and
> keep a healthy community.

The Coordinator group is the "clear leadership" right now. We have been
in a slump though, and we admit it, well Marcus and Doug have been
putting in hours but me and Cees for example have been quite busy with
our private lives. We intend to do something about this though (not
clear just yet exactly what). 

> Quite frankly, as a newcomer to Squeak, I find the project to be a
> mess. I don't mean to offend anybody, it is obvious that there is
> talented and devoted people working on Squeak.

It is messy, and it has always been. :) In some ways it is probably due
to the "variety" of the project - there isn't a single group working on
it but a number of groups trying to inter-correlate. And after SqC
stepped down it has been hard to attract enough man power and commitment
to get a strong such group in place.

So in short - we know it is messy - and we want it to be better. And we
are trying. Simple as that. :)

> However, the website's
> latest entry in "Where is Squeak Headed?" is for 2000, and if you were
> to believe it, you would think Alan Kay et al are still working at
> Disney.

The old website has been up far too long - there is a new one brewing
but the reason it isn't up yet is because it is built using SmallWiki
which turned out to be quite flaky. And yes, I stand by that statement
until someone with SmallWiki expertise help us out. :) Exactly where we
are going because of that flakiness is not clear to me at the moment -
Jason Rogers is Team lead on that project.

> The wiki is not much better either, and the best example comes from
> the future of Squeak page: "The fact that there isn't a more recent
> update does not imply that squeak is abandoned." Rats! It's a wiki!
> Why can't someone write something more than that for 2004-2005?

Well, the Swiki tends to come a bit down the prio list. It is huge and
IMHO very hard to keep up to date so lots of us don't really bother. And
the fact is that Swikis tend to make people afraid of deleting old info
because you don't know who is the author and if you will upset that
person or not.

IMHO a Swiki with the role that the Squeak Swiki has would be better off
if each page was "owned" by an editor that could make the decisions for
it.

So I don't have a good answer to what we should do to improve the Swiki
(a part of the obvious need to devote a few hours to it of course and
fix some of the glaring problems).

Perhaps someone could arrange a CleanUpSqueakSwikiWeek? That would be
great. Care to help doing that? (you knew it was coming, didn't ya? :))

> I wonder how many newcomers find this, and simply move on. I did it
> twice. It is all pretty disheartening.

Well, I agree.

> There was quite a bit of activity in the list about a new website a
> couple of weeks ago, but now the subject has quieted down, and the
> website is still its own old same.

That work is moving forward on its own mailinglist - with a Team leader
too. Sure, it has been way to long in the making - but I blame
SmallWiki. In fact, I am starting to seriously considering suggesting to
move to something else.

> There was another thread about
> getting the word out about Squeak by means of blogs, which is a good
> idea, but it won't do any good at all if the website just turn people
> away.

The website will be fixed - the new one looks quite good - just a bit of
content missing, and we just need to make SmallWiki stop tripping us up.
 
> IMHO, a priority should be to get the new website in place, and the
> wiki reorganized. It should be obvious what is what:
>   - Squeaks:  Squeak, Tweak, wxSqueak, Croquet?
>   - Websites: squeak, squeak foundation, croquet, squeak land,  smalll
> land, others?
>   - Swikis: squeak, squeak foundation, the coordinator's one, others?
>   - Mailing lists. Although this seems to be the only active one..
> and who's who:
>   - Is the Squeak foundation significant at all?

I know you didn't expect me to answer these questions in this email -
but anyway:
Yes, SqF is still significant - but it hasn't started playing a role
yet.

>   - The Guides. Do they really guide?

No, the Guides are retired. The Coordinators is the current leadership
and yes, we have been a bit silent over the summer. We will change that.

>   - etc..
> 
> There just seems to be too many of each!
> 
> Anyway, I better stop now for now!
> 
> Best Regards,
> 
> Victor Rodriguez.

Well, we are all listening, and we mostly are aware of the problems.
Now, the best thing you can do is to join in and help us. The website
Team for example - why not join that list and help out?

regards, Göran