> (Btw, you can reply to squeak-dev with this - fine with me. In fact, I would
> like it to - but that's your call.)

Okay.

> Though I suspect it may have to do with a different view on what SS is these
> days. I don't see it as an archive. An archive is READ ONLY. An archive SAYS
> it is an archive.

Yeah, I think you're right that this is the crux of our disagreement.
The reason I see SS as an archive is the recent history.  That, and
When you have a "service" that, on its home page, tells is users that
new project creation is disabled and to go elsewhere to startup a new
project, -- and also in consideration of WHY that was done, as an act
of _preservation_ (because file-based SS cannot scale), then yes, we
are in "preservation mode" when it comes to SS, hence my aversion to
deleting a bunch of projects out of it.

I did push to make it 100% read-only but, as usual, was foiled by
majority community opinion.  So we now have this half-ass'd "thing"
running out there whose role in our ecosystem is ambiguous, at best.
But, whatever...!

>>> Molest? Lame? Ok, your language is a bit rough - but I gather you don't
>>> want
>>> us to do ANYTHING at all with Andreas projects then?
>>
>>
>> My position has nothing to do with Andreas.  It applies to anyone's
>> project, alive or not.
>>
>> The reason I said molest because it feels unsavory to go into
>> someone's account and change things around, even if they're not around
>> anymore.  It doesn't seem like something we should be too cavalier
>> about, we should really think about it and see if its truly necessary
>> to do it.
>
> I am fine with that position in general. Although IMHO if we do NOTHING for
> accounts of people that are no longer with us, it ends up misleading.
>
>> If we get on board with a real catalog, I think we can do it.

(Note:  "I think we can do it" should have said, "I DON'T think we
need to do it."

> I loved the idea of a canonical catalog. I fought to prevent SS overlapping
> with SM and I lost that fight. These days we have Pharo too - and they are
> recreating their own catalogs etc, even seems to be more than one...
>
> So I consider the fight lost. You only seem to consider Squeak (similar to
> as you accused me of only considering Pharo) - when you say "I think we can
> do it" I don't think you are including the Pharo community in that, are you?

Of course I am including Pharo community!  That's why I mentioned
their "new catalog".

>>>> I said we should make a *new* project, of our *own*.  And let the new
>>>> Pharo catalog, Squeak catalog and search-engines direct people to the
>>>> new project.
>>>
>>>
>>> Well, problem is that SS is *also* a *catalog*. You can search in it and
>>> browse in it and google can index parts of it, and google is also a
>>> catalog.
>>
>>
>> You have really forgotten how rich your SM domain is as a catalog
>> model.  You designed it back then when we faced the same problem we do
>> now:  Uncertainty about where and how external software is loaded.  SS
>> knows nothing about external locations like SS3 or SmalltalkHub, a
>> catalog does.  SS knows nothing about what version of Squeak or Pharo
>> I need to use version 123 of Package XYZ.  A catalog does.  That's the
>> problem it solves -- documenting what software works with what and
>> where to get it.  SS is just a SC repository.
>
> I sympathize with the idea you paint of course - as you know. But I don't
> agree with this being a picture reflecting reality.
>
> - SS is a catalog too.
> - SS3 is a catalog too.
> - StHub is a catalog too.
> - Pharo project has at least one more catalog.
> - Metacello does all the "versions for this and that" these days in Pharo
> land.

You can't just declare something a catalog because it has a collection
of projects.  There are many more use-cases and requirements of a
catalog than that.

StHub doesn't even have a Browse function, one of the most basic
use-cases of a catalog!  None of the above (except Metacello) knows
one IOTA about anything in any repository other than its own.

By definition, that's not a catalog.

Göran, YOU were the one who, about 10 years ago, opened MY eyes to the
distinction of a Catalog domain from a Source-Code-Repository domain.
What happened man?

>> If you want to put external URL information that one would expect to
>> find in the catalog in the SC repository "notes" field for your
>> projects, you can do that.  But to break into another account and do
>> it is something I think we should ask ourselves, "is this _really_
>> necessary, or should we just have a catalog since that solves this and
>> so many other issues too?"
>
> Again, I agree that a single canonical catalog that everyone would use, both
> Pharo and Squeakers is a great thing to have. But we do not have it.

Hmm, what is this?

    https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-contribution/job/PharoProjectCatalog/HTML_Report/

What is this?

    http://map.squeak.org/

Again, one requirement for a catalog is to document the external URL.
But you want to sprinkle that kind of information into the SC
repository entries "notes" fields themselves.  That's why I used the
word "lame" but

>>>> Well, for the purposes for which you want to delete your projects (to
>>>> meet a cataloging requirement) makes me want to seriously consider it.
>>>
>>> Its not a "cataloging requirement", its the fact that I just want to host
>>> my
>>> code in a single place (as far as I can). Now, I have always viewed SS as
>>> a
>>> hosting *service*.
>>
>>
>> SS WAS a hosting service.  Now its a preserved archive.  That's why
>
> No it is NOT. You need to admit this. Just read:
>
> "Welcome to SqueakSource, the smart Monticello code repository for Squeak
> and Pharo. To get started, register your personal account. You'll
> immediately get all the necessary permissions to create and manage your
> account, projects and versions."
>
> It does NOT say archive anywhere. It is NOT read only (as archives should
> be). IT IS NOT AN ARCHIVE. Sorry for capitals.
>
> NOTE: The welcome text is really bad - I mean, it says I can create
> projects, and then it says I can not...

Yeah, the old original text is "preserved" but then the red box is the new text.

>>> You telling me that you may decide to forbid me from administrating my
>>> own
>>> projects thus taking them from me - makes me want to just go there RIGHT
>>> NOW
>>> and delete all my projects and beating you to it.
>>>
>>> And yeah, I am seriously considering it too.
>>
>>
>> You keep ignoring the organic-growth problem.  Sure, you could delete
>> them but somewhere someone using an old version has a backup and so
>> what if THEY re-added those projects, under the same name, but now
>> under their admin?
>
> Sure, they are free to do that - but people tend *not* to. And even if they
> did it would not be under my name. Big difference.

Well, maybe that's a solution then.  Assigning someone else as admin /
developer and then taking your name off the projects?

>> Now its same confusion with google-searching and
>> which one is the latest, etc.  Trying to make StHub or SS or SS3 be
>> catalogs just doesn't work when others' projects are involved, I only
>> trying to suggest a better solution.
>
> Current pragmatism is one thing. The ideal solution is another :)
>
> And oh, just to make things even more complex - some Pharo people are moving
> to using github now...

All the more reason, Göran, for you to re-embrace the _idea_ of a real catalog.

Until that idea takes root and people in the community actually
_accept_ it, we will continue to languish in the very "confusion" you
want to avoid.