Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>
> On 02.09.2009, at 09:33, Damien Cassou wrote:
>
>> On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:51 PM, Michael van der
>> Gulik<mikevdg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Would it perhaps be better to have the automated trunk commit
>>> messages going
>>> to some other dedicated mailing list?
Which we already have.
>> With squeaksource, it is easy to get an RSS feed of a package. That
>> way only people interested get noticed.
>
>
> Why would people on squeak-dev not be interested in Squeak development?
1. Not having time.

2. Poluting the exisiting actual human messages with extra stuff to
trawl through when you are searching for something.

3. I tried commit messages on the release list 3 years ago and it  was
shot down in 2 minutes, so we adopted the packages list to receive
commit emails from squeaksource.

4. The more you do on trunk, the more of a porting effort is looming in
the future, because trunk isn't targeted at exisiting users, nor is
there a migration path for existing images. This is the same mistake
made between 3.8 and 3.9, and squeak->pharo. Thus relegating existing
users to stay with the images they are in now. Trunk is a fork of 3.10
and thus every commit to trunk and every commit email fills me with
dread and a desire to move to a more stable platform.

If you were to make planned innovations somewhere else (i.e. the release
list etc) which were delivered to the community (squeak-dev) in a
documented form for exisitn 3.9/3.10 images with an impact analysis of
some kind, then I could see squeak moving forwards in a useful manner.
Otherwise the rest is just noise.

Keith