* https://github.com/squeak-smalltalk/
* https://github.com/squeak-smalltalk/squeak-ci/

Note that any existing references to
https://github.com/frankshearar/squeak-ci/ are safe; this link will
now automatically (thanks to the awesome power of GitHub) redirect you
to squeak-ci's new home.

frank

On 20 May 2013 10:25, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
> Since the score's currently {squeak-smalltalk: 3 squeak-project: 0} (I
> changed my mind - today, it's more important to let people find us),
> I've renamed the organisation to "squeak-smalltalk".
>
> I must stress that this can be changed; I'm squatting the name until
> the community rejects it.
>
> (Now if I could just see some commits in proportion to the amount of
> bikeshedding I'd be even happier! (*))
>
> frank
>
> (*) Not that there's been a huge amount of bikeshed. I remain in hope/horror.
>
> On 20 May 2013 06:40, Casey Ransberger <casey.obrien.r at gmail.com> wrote:
>> And I second squeak-smalltalk if someone can nab it.
>>
>> Squeak is presently -- in my view anyway -- both a dialect and a family thereof. Spiritual and literal descendant thing more or less aside:)
>>
>> On May 19, 2013, at 12:41 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 19 May 2013 20:17, Edgar J. De Cleene <edgardec2005 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 5/19/13 2:11 PM, "Frank Shearar" <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> While Squeak may be a Smalltalk now, I don't particularly think we
>>>>> ought to suggest that it will _always_ be a Smalltalk.
>>>>
>>>> You believe this???
>>>
>>> Well, OK. It depends on what exactly you mean by "Smalltalk". If you
>>> mean Smalltalk-80, then definitely not. If you mean ANSI Smalltalk,
>>> then probably not. I don't see much value in sticking to "standards"
>>> 15 years and older.
>>>
>>> But let's stick to the name. I can see a pretty strong argument for
>>> "squeak-smalltalk" simply because that's what we've always been
>>> called.
>>>
>>> frank
>>>
>>>> Edgar
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>