Em 28-06-2009 15:10, Ian Trudel escreveu:
> (...)
>> I generally do not agree with those that think "corporate support" or "paid
>> work" is the solution. Sorry, I just don't.
>>
>> I don't want a company deciding what happens with Squeak. Definitely not.
>>
>>      
>
> Göran, I do understand your concern about this. We should remember
> that there is no ultimate solution. I think his idea was rather about
> integrating this as part of a solution. Nothing to do with "a company
> deciding on Squeak". Furthermore, ignoring companies and commercial
> activities is also not a solution at all.
>
> There is a huge difference between offering support to companies (and
> asking support from them) and having them running Squeak Oversight
> Board. I think we all agree the latter is undesirable and should not
> happen.
>
> Ian.
>
>    
I would like to add that currently much of Linux development has 
corporate support. Without that linux would be dead or would be in the 
same instance as, let's say, FreeBSD. That doesn't mean that 
corporations are telling which direction linux must follow. Linux is 
only the most obvious example.

But I don't like to look at Squeak only as a toy platform that some MSc 
and PhD students can use to develop their works. I guess that people 
who's supporting their packages since old releases will agree with me. 
Besides, most people in the smalltalk communities ask the question: why 
Java did it while smalltalk didn't? And the answers are all around: Java 
had documentation from day 0. Java was really cross platform from day 0. 
Java was highly standardized. Java didn't oversaw day to day 
requirements as internationalization and comprehensive file and network 
support... And now the list of languages that are doing while smalltalk 
is spinning around is growing with Python, Ruby and other 
languages/environments. And I feel dismay when I see that even 
traditional smalltalk distributions (like Cincom VW) are loosing spin.

In short: money is not a bad thing. It allows development. Even when we 
are in academic environments money help to justify research and 
development projects. Want another example? SWI-Prolog.

But lack of money can be a problem. How many bright smalltalk 
researchers cannot work as much as they need/want to because they're 
involved in all sort of "more important, more immediate" projects? How 
many people left smalltalk development (not only squeak) to work in 
"more profitable areas"? Even people as Mr. Ungar and Mr. Kay and others 
had to stop/reduce participating strongly in Squeak committee due to 
other professional duties. That signs that for their current employers 
Squeak is not important enough to justify time employed in deciding its 
present and future.

When I was younger, working at university, I had this prejudice against 
money and "corporate support" and believed strongly in the obligation of 
State to financially support projects that would never ever pay 
themselves. That the "market" was controlled by a bunch of unlettered 
execs refractory to changes. Life proved that this prejudice didn't make 
me any good.

CdAB
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20090628/e4b6a265/attachment.htm