Hi Stef,

Good communication implies being clear when writing about sensitive topics, especially when communicating through virtual channels. I am not in Europe, so I cannot discuss these things with you face to face. Therefore is not clear to me (and others) what are your policies in many subjects. Lately I also delayed the release of packages because my lack of motivation around this community, specially when discussions exists around three or fourth topics for months.

Another "motivational" case for me. I stopped to report bugs in fogbuz because I felt there was too much "Won't fix" for me (specifically by a person but I won't go there...) even in cases where it was ilogical. Then I felt tired of reading "It's like that. Invalid".

About features.

What's the policy about voting for default features in next Pharo images? Let's suppose I am a VM/core Pharo maintainer and I want to include MySuperPackage into a Pharo release, which nobody needs (and I don't care), but it is useful to me.... there will ever be voting there? (note it doesn't makes sense if you are a group of 50 always supporting your work)

Images are becoming huge (at least for my workflows). There will be (more) packages included by default (for promotion?) ?

How do you plan to manage if some people want the Tests be removed from the official Image? (Personally I never run them)

Another example, what happens if another research group came with a better alternative to Calypso, Brick, Telescope, Bloc. Would you integrate first your tool to mark territory? Who decides? For example (IIRC) TxText and Twisty. The same applies if anyone came with another rewrite of classic Smalltalk Workspace, Debugger and Inspector tools, what would you do with GT? GT stays because it came before and others would be optional?

There will be anything like PEPs?

If someone can answer me I think that would be an example of good communication.

Hern��n