On Mon, 2009-07-06 at 15:36 -0600, Ken G. Brown wrote:
> I would like to present my sincere congratulations to Keith for
> continuing to talk sense against all odds, in presenting the Squeak
> community with such a well thought out way forward along with the
> mostly working code to implement the process.
> 
> Sure, there are bound to be improvements that could be applied, and I
> feel that is where the SOB could have put their efforts, and not
> towards presenting yet another way of continuing the development
> processes that resulted in our current situation in the first place.
> In my opinion this fundamentally comes from the attitude of  'do the
> simplest thing that could possibly work', and not do 'the best thing
> in the best possible way'.
> 
> And congratulations too to Igor for apparently taking the time to
> understand what Keith is talking about, as shown by Igor's +100
> comment below.
> 
> I am very disappointed in the current extremely short-sighted view and
> direction that is being taken by the SOB.
> 
> I am also extremely disappointed in the way the SOB has been treating
> the people involved ie Keith and Matthew mainly. Might I suggest
> significant improvement in the area of people skills as a high
> priority going forward. 
> 
> Thank you Keith.
> 
> Ken G. Brown

Ken,

I appreciate you providing your point of view but I have to ask you how
you have actively participated in the development of 3.11.  I ask this
not because I don't know the answer or don't remember (which is not to
say that I do) or because I'm trying to single you out but because I'm
trying to understand the disconnect that seems to be going on.

You have to understand that when the SOB discussed this there was
absolutely no question among the seven of us that the current state of
the development of Squeak was untenable.  We have frankly been inundated
with complaints on one hand and near silence from contributors.  To see
what I mean take a glance at

 http://bugs.squeak.org/view_all_bug_page.php

If it is not already, be sure to set the project (upper right) to
'Squeak').  Note that the 50 most recent issues (any change at all will
pop an issue to the top of this list, except of course if the issue is
closed which will remove it from the default view) cover a time period
of nearly 3 months.  Dig deeper and look at the changes in that time
period and the number of people participating and you find that very
little is going on on this side of things.  And yet this is the only way
to submit a change under Keith's proposal.  Of course you could also be
directly working on Installer/Bob/MC but as far as I can tell the
community involved there is similarly small.

Can I take it that your preference now would be for us to completely
retract the changes proposed by Andreas and go back to the way things
were say 10 days ago?

Ken
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20090706/082bea68/attachment.pgp