On Sat, 2009-06-27 at 23:44 +0200, Göran Krampe wrote:
> Hi all!
> 
> Matthew Fulmer wrote:
> > Awesome job guys. The volume of improvements Pharo has over
> > Squeak really makes me wonder if the latter has any real
> > relevance anymore.
> 
> Yes, it is quite an interesting situation IMHO, and one that most of us 
> could foresee too I think.
> 
> NOTE: Read the following with a nice bucket of love, ok? I don't intend 
> to make anyone upset. :) And sorry for the long post.
> 
> On one hand I really appreciate the Pharo project - lots of good people 
> doing lots of good progress etc. It seems to be doing simply great.
> 
> On the other hand the "negative" effect I can see is the "drain" it has 
> caused (I think) from squeak.org/squeak-dev. In other words, squeak.org 
> has lost a lot of momentum, and of course not only due to the birth of 
> Pharo I should add. And in many ways Pharo may also be the "rescue" to 
> squeak.org. God knows we have been trying to find "our way" lately and 
> with... less impressive results. :)
> 
> So... how will the future evolve? Does the Squeak community (in the 
> large sense) have anything to gain from keeping both the squeak.org and 
> the pharo fork "alive"?
> 
> I presume we have at least the following three scenarios:
> 
> 1. Continue as now and take no specific action. This will probably lead 
> to Squeak.org going weaker and Pharo stronger by the day. Developers 
> will want to be where the "action" is. Soon squeak.org turns irrelevant 
> and dies a slow death.
> 
> 2. Take some decisive action and "merge" the two in some *smart* way 
> beneficial to both. Impossible? I hope not.
> 
> 3. Just kill off squeak.org. A mercy kill :). Then people could move 
> over to Pharo without having to think about it - there is no other "Squeak".
> 
> Eh, well, my analysis is probably full of silly holes here. Looking at 
> the above, 1 and 3 feels less nice. So how could a "merge" look that 
> would be attractive to *both* camps? I call the theoretical merged 
> project Phreak below (but I am not proposing name changes etc, but I 
> need a name to use in the text).
> 
> Pharo characteristics:
> 
> - A small "benevolent dictator" board. Lots of action, less talk.
> - Has a very clear stated "direction".
> - Has a website using CMSBox.
> - Uses Google code for issue tracker and wiki.
> - Has Mailman mailinglists and downloads at gforge.inria.fr (I think)
> 
> Squeak.org org characteristics:
> 
> - Has an elected SOB, an election process and a Team model. The jury is 
> still out I think, we seem to have lots of trouble "getting shit done".
> - Has very little stated "direction" at the moment.
> - Has a website using Swazoo.
> - Uses Mantis, Swiki, file archive and Mailman on a community paid 
> Hetzner server.
> 
> Now... why would Squeak.org want to merge with Pharo?
> 
> Pros: Get momentum back. 1 + 1 = 2. A revitalization. Very important!
> 
> Cons: The SOB & Team model would probably have to be dropped. The work 
> made since Pharo forked may or may not be a "lost cause", that depends 
> on if Phreak is interested in utilizing that work. Other cons?
> 
> ...and Pharo?
> 
> Pros: An influx of developers. A much stronger position as Phreak would 
> be Squeak + Pharo. No "compatibility" to worry about, Squeak is out of 
> the picture.
> 
> Cons: Some people in Pharo may perceive such a merge as dangerous since 
> they might be afraid that certain aspects of Squeak.org (that Pharo was 
> created in order to escape from) is coming back "knocking on the door".
> 
> I personally don't think there is such a danger if Phreak simply adopts 
> the simple organisation of Pharo (with board and all) BUT... since it 
> would make the Pharo community much *larger* the effects of that growth 
> need to be taken into account. But Pharo should not fear growth, because 
> that would be an odd position.
> 
> How could a merge be done practically? I really don't know :). And I 
> must stop typing now, this post is waaaaay to long anyway and I have 
> probably stepped on too many toes already.
> 
> regards, Göran

> 
> 

I am new here and not really qualified to comment on this issue. Please
take my input as having good intentions. Specifically, I do not want to
start a flame war over the pros and cons of various projects.

There is much to learn from the history of the BSD community.
(Disclaimer: I am a huge fan of FreeBSD.) The FreeBSD project began with
the goal of creating an open-source OS for Intel i386 hardware that was
as faithful as possible to BSD Unix. In time the developers were going
in three directions. One group wanted high performance, a second wanted
portability to every possible platform, and a third wanted high
reliability and security. There were also the usual personality
conflicts and differing opinions on how to manage the project.
Eventually it forked, twice, giving us FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD.
Each has its own personality, its own strengths. The good news is they
cross-pollinate each other.

As for Squeak, I have been working on my Open Slate concept for almost
ten years and one of the biggest obstacles I have encountered is a
suitable software environment. I'll spare you the explanation, my point
being that Squeak is the best thing I have found. Alan Kay knew what he
was doing.

It looks to me like Pharo is a Smalltalk for building grown-up apps.
Very much like the Smalltalk I began with, which produced apps with the
look and feel of the host Microsoft Windows. I think there is a need for
that. I take it Pharo is new, and as such it has been luring developers
away from Squeak. The potential for good in this outweighs whatever the
negative consequences may be, because, like the BSDs, the Squeak
developers can always pull in what they like from Pharo.

Do not confuse a fork with a divorce. Think of it as mitosis. The more
the merrier.

I believe that the impact of Squeak on education has yet to be realized.
The necessary hardware -- the visionary Dynabook -- is just appearing.
It will be years before there are enough skilled teachers for the
critical mass required for the paradigm shift to occur. And there is the
culture change, so difficult in a field as institutionalized as modern
education. What we have been seeing are the Smalltalk explorers and
trail blazers, the pioneers to whom we will someday owe an enormous debt
of gratitude.

I am in no position to recommend anything here, but I will just the
same. Please forgive me. I recommend that Squeak not be killed off, or
merged. Let the fork live on.

I cannot close without saying that "Phreak" would be a very bad name :-)

-- 
Gary Dunn, Honolulu
osp at aloha.com
http://openslate.net/
http://e9erust.blogspot.com/
Sent from Slate001