Stéphane Rollandin wrote:
> yes, sorry if my question sounded offensive. only it seems to me that 
> there is quite a shift of focus from some members of this list from 
> Squeak to Pharo, and it is not clear to me what is the dominant mindset 
> there. the idea that worthy people might consider Squeak as a dead-end 
> is a bit unsettling for me. I just wanted to have some feedback about it.

First of all, Squeak isn't dead. 3.11 is chugging along, 4.0 is making 
progress. We have some interesting new tools available (Installer etc) 
to simplify contributions.

What is lacking is the same thing that has always been lacking: A way of 
making decisions which are generally accepted by the community at large. 
As projects grow, you need a way of making such decisions and for 
Squeak, after SqC was no longer available as the decision makers, no 
other generally accepted body has been established.

Last year I had really hoped Dan might be the person to break this 
impasse. From my perspective he is the only person that pretty much 
every member in this community can agree with. Unfortunately, it didn't 
work out.

But when the mightier are unavailable, the lesser have to stand up. 
Consequently, I am running in the election this year with one and only 
one purpose: Fix the processes. Make it possible to come to decisions 
that are accepted by the community at large. I have started to post my 
thoughts along these lines at:

http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2009-February/134256.html

I think that if we can fix the contribution process we will see a 
resurgence of Squeak contributions. Put this together with a 
license-clean 4.0 and I think we'll be in a good shape for the next years.

Cheers,
   - Andreas