thanks for the lesson, master.


> Hi all -
>
> stéphane ducasse wrote:
>> And I hated the remark that we should do it for fun... sure  
>> harvesting bugs is so incredibily fun and give us so much  
>> energy!!!! ...duh?
>> Look at marcus state of mind now.
>
> Do it for fun or don't do it at all. Unless you're getting paid  
> there is just no point in ruining yourself over it. Coincidentally,  
> I have made that point a couple of times to Marcus, too. But both  
> of you seem to be people who have a very, very hard time to let go.  
> Even just a little.
>
>>>      As Stef says, the Foundation received a donation from ESUG  
>>> in the
>>> past, at his behest. Later, when ESUG initiated its "SummerTalk"  
>>> program
>>> (after a failed last-minute bid for Google sponsorship), Stef
>>> effectively demanded that the Foundation sponsor SummerTalk  
>>> projects. He
>>> threatened us with a negative reaction from ESUG if we didn't use  
>>> its
>>> donation in that way (as he reiterates below).
>> I never said that. I never threatened anybody about that.
>
> Maybe you are unaware about the impact of your English but a  
> statement like "I will report to the ESUG board the situation and  
> they will certainly not agree to give more money for SqF and they  
> will be right." coming from a member of the ESUG board *is* a  
> threat. If you're still the president (http://www.esug.org/about/ 
> boardelectedin2004/) it would be even more of a threat.
>
>> I just said that I could not decently ask ESUG to give us money if  
>> we do nothing with it. The same for other sponsors. I would feel  
>> bad to contact people
>> and ask them to financially support us if we do not have
>> results to show or at least projects to spend the money on.
>
> Well, yes. But you start out with the assumption that you're going  
> to raise money regardless of whether the money is needed or not (an  
> attitude I know from my university days - first get money, then  
> figure out what to do, then get more ;-) This is not necessarily  
> the right attitude for the SqF. If the SqF comes up with an idea  
> that requires funding, then it may be time to go get it. In the  
> mean time, in particular if there is no agreement on how to spend  
> any money, it is probably wiser not to raise any money to avoid  
> precisely the kind of frustration you're describing.
>
>> ESUG gave money to squeak.e.v and we never ask what they did with  
>> it. Now if Squeak.e.v wants more money ESUG will ask what for.
>
> Yes. ESUG should *always* ask what the money is for. You must be  
> living in a different world if people give you money without asking  
> what it's for.
>
>>>        It's great that the beginner list is a success. However, I  
>>> don't
>>> think it makes sense to tie the merit of one idea (bounties) to the
>>> success of another (the beginner list) simply because the same  
>>> person
>>> advocated them both.
>> I was not.
>
> Yes you were. Just like you were trying to tie the previous pragma  
> discussion with Lukas to the current discussion about FFI syntax  
> now. You're doing it all it all the time.
>
>> We never ask for rewards or congratulation. We asked for notice that
>> the situation cannot continue like that and that this is important  
>> to help
>> there and since really few people take care of squeak release and  
>> integration then this is not these people (me and marcus) that will
>> have the time to do it.
>
> I think it's time for both of you to get out of it for a while (see  
> above). Finish up 3.9 and let the board deal with it - if the board  
> is really as incapable as you seem to think it'll show really  
> quickly. In the mean time I happen to think that someone a little  
> less ... ugh ... involved, might be a better person to deal with  
> releases. Less coding, more management, if you know what I mean. Do  
> we have any producers / product manager types out there?
>
>>>      Stef, I'm disappointed that you feel as you do, and wish you
>>> success and fulfillment in however you choose to spend your time.
>> You are so kind and I'm so nasty.
>
> Indeed, this is precisely the way it comes across. Craig wrote a  
> great memo, laying out the issues in what I thought was a  
> remarkably objective and detailed way. Spreading insults in return  
> does make you look rather nasty.
>
> Cheers,
>   - Andreas
>