2009/12/16 Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com>:

2009/12/16 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>:

...

I will reply because this situation is silly and keith has some good points.

Yes, silly, by fact that currently there are two groups of people each putting improvements over different places of merely same thing, duplicating an effort(s). But anyways, its better than sitting and waiting for Great New Thing (c) to be released by someone. I just hope, that at some day both forks will adopt DeltaStreams to make our life a bit easier in respect of sharing the code.

Sometimes it's good to see two different solutions. It makes you think twice. Nicolas

...

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: keith <keith_hodges@yahoo.co.uk> Date: 2009/12/16 Subject: Re: [squeak-dev] Stuff To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list <squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org>

...

So the question is, has ever been considered to simply build the bridge between communities and to use the PharoCore image as the base for Squeak?

This wouldn't work for the same reasons that it wouldn't work to use a Squeak-trunk image as the basis for Pharo. You should propose that at some point just to see what kind of reaction you get ;-)

Cheers,    - Andreas

Yes please propose it. That is an excellent idea. Lets use the PharoCore image as the base for future Squeak releases! It would work excellently, it might require some humility from Andreas. In my opinion it is the only sensible way forward. Let me divulge a little secret here, the biggest reason that we kept the original 3.11 development always said to be about "process" and not about the actual release image, is that with a decent image building and testing process in place it would then have been possible to build and test a future squeak release pilot on top of some of the pharo-core packages. For us Pharo was simply a pilot project moving the core forward that we could borrow the best bits from it as appropriate. By adopting pharo in carefully integrated pieces we would perhaps of stood a chance of keeping the community together. The annoying thing was that Pharo team seemed to be insisting on diverging far more than was necessary and consistently refused to adopt any shared values or code that would have made this approach easier, we really need as a starting point, shared code loading tools, package management tools, and shared testing tools at the very least. i.e. Installer, and MC1.5/6 were developed with this in mind, and so was SUnit-improved, but the Pharo team refused to touch either of these projects. The more that the squeak-core image changes (i.e. in trunk) without tracking pharo's core packages the more diverse and impossible future integration will become. The old 3.11 effort was about having the tools to enable packages to be developed and tested in both Pharo and Squeak and all other forks, and then extending this to suggest common core packages as a way forward for everyone. So now that our to-be carefully planned evolution of squeak-core, using pharo for inspiration, has been trashed by random hacking on trunk, adopting PharoCore as a base image is probably the viable way forward for this community to remain viable. You already know that I don't see the squeak community as viable, since it eats its young. Sooner or later the board or someone will realize this, they will get elected to the board, and all those of you who have been working hard on trunk will discover that all your contributions have been wasted. Never mind eh. Keith

-- Cédrick

_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

On Dec 16, 2009, at 9:15 AM, GeertClaes wrote:

I don't know the entire background and I most definitively don't want to start something here but it looks like politics. The "Pharo Project" team seems to have achieved more in 1 year than Squeak had in a decade - from my point of view :)

Yes I agree. I will not reply.

I am a bit confused what the idea of Squeak using PharoCore as the base (or core) would be? Is the suggestion to have Squeak become a sub-project of Pharo, building on top of PharoCore in a similar way as Pharo (dev/web) does? I wouldn't think the Squeak team is willing to handover the "core" to Pharo, otherwise there would never have been a Pharo project in the first place .... or am I barking up the wrong tree? Anyhow, better package management and code sharing (simpler) would be great :)

No you are right. I was dreaming of a beautiful world but it does not exist. I will continue to push pharo to be a vehicule for people to make a living and create a market around it. Now it will be less easier. Stef

-- View this message in context: http://n2.nabble.com/Fwd-squeak-dev-Stuff-tp4174205p4174266.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

On 16 Dec 2009, at 08:15, GeertClaes wrote:

I don't know the entire background and I most definitively don't want to start something here but it looks like politics. The "Pharo Project" team seems to have achieved more in 1 year than Squeak had in a decade - from my point of view :)

Yeah but I actually had a plan, and that plan was manifest in lots of technology improvements that are external to the core. The fact that pharo core moved on, did not mean that it was leaving squeak behind, because Pharo still doesn't have have any of those improvements, you are still limping along with only one core group of developers in charge, no test tools, and none of the actual problems I need fixing have been fixed yet. (changes file limits?) We were just putting our emphasis in different places. We wanted tools like atomic loading. (unfortunately Pharo team took the expertise needed to make that happen) People doing actual work can cope with a less than optimal core for a few years. However having package management and testing tools that work is far more useful. We did all that in the squeak community. But due to the squeak board panicing and throwing all of the 4 years of progress away because they didn't understand the extent of it. They too went back to a 3.10 base image and forked, so now it does indeed look like squeak made no progress. My point of view is that squeak has made much more progress on important things than pharo has. When I started using squeak it was unusable because it wasn't possible to load anything due to lack of documentation of dependencies. Now due to politics all of those advances have been binned and so Pharo wins by default. There should not even be a competition. I detest competition, and because everything I have tried to do in collaboration over 4 years has ended up in a competition, this has led me to simply leave the community. In 4 years I have only ever had 2 people offer to work with me on something.

I am a bit confused what the idea of Squeak using PharoCore as the base (or core) would be? Is the suggestion to have Squeak become a sub- project of

No the idea would be to share common core packages such as Network, Collections, Compiler, building upon usage of common packages such as MC and SUnit, which are needed for loading and testing.

Pharo, building on top of PharoCore in a similar way as Pharo (dev/ web) does? I wouldn't think the Squeak team is willing to handover the "core" to Pharo, otherwise there would never have been a Pharo project in the first place .... or am I barking up the wrong tree?

The Pharo team never asked for the opportunity to develop the new version of squeak if they had submitted a proposal at the time, I am sure it would have been considered. However they didn't want to be involved in the politics, and I cant say I blame them.

Anyhow, better package management and code sharing (simpler) would be great :)

Sake/Packages was available a year ago. Keith

...

The Pharo team never asked for the opportunity to develop the new version of squeak if they had submitted a proposal at the time, I am sure it would have been considered.

People were against the roadmap we sent for after 3.9 (you remember that) then we were idiots because we use MC, did traits and a lot more kind of shit.

However they didn't want to be involved in the politics, and I cant say I blame them.

...

Anyhow, better package management and code sharing (simpler) would be great :)

Sake/Packages was available a year ago

I know, I read it and I could not understand. I even tried to write a book chapter on it but I failed. I can send the draft to prove it. Stef

...

...

...

The Pharo team never asked for the opportunity to develop the new version of squeak if they had submitted a proposal at the time, I am sure it would have been considered.

People were against the roadmap we sent for after 3.9 (you remember that) then we were idiots because we use MC, did traits and a lot more kind of shit.

...

However they didn't want to be involved in the politics, and I cant say I blame them.

...

Anyhow, better package management and code sharing (simpler) would be great :)

Sake/Packages was available a year ago

I know, I read it and I could not understand. I even tried to write a book chapter on it but I failed. I can send the draft to prove it.

Did you read the class comment?

Did you see the video on vimeo?

yes after way after.... I even got your voice :) But I understand your feeling. Stef

2009/12/16 keith <keith_hodges@yahoo.co.uk>:

On 16 Dec 2009, at 08:15, GeertClaes wrote:

I don't know the entire background and I most definitively don't want to start something here but it looks like politics.  The "Pharo Project" team seems to have achieved more in 1 year than Squeak had in a decade - from my point of view :)

Yeah but I actually had a plan, and that plan was manifest in lots of technology improvements that are external to the core. The fact that pharo core moved on, did not mean that it was leaving squeak behind, because Pharo still doesn't have have any of those improvements, you are still limping along with only one core group of developers in charge, no test tools, and none of the actual problems I need fixing have been fixed yet. (changes file limits?) We were just putting our emphasis in different places. We wanted tools like atomic loading. (unfortunately Pharo team took the expertise needed to make that happen) People doing actual work can cope with a less than optimal core for a few years. However having package management and testing tools that work is far more useful. We did all that in the squeak community. But due to the squeak board panicing and throwing all of the 4 years of progress away because they didn't understand the extent of it. They too went back to a 3.10 base image and forked, so now it does indeed look like squeak made no progress. My point of view is that squeak has made much more progress on important things than pharo has. When I started using squeak it was unusable because it wasn't possible to load anything due to lack of documentation of dependencies. Now due to politics all of those advances have been binned and so Pharo wins by default. There should not even be a competition. I detest competition, and because everything I have tried to do in collaboration over 4 years has ended up in a competition, this has led me to simply leave the community. In 4 years I have only ever had 2 people offer to work with me on something.

I am a bit confused what the idea of Squeak using PharoCore as the base (or core) would be?  Is the suggestion to have Squeak become a sub-project of

No the idea would be to share common core packages such as Network, Collections, Compiler, building upon usage of common packages such as MC and SUnit, which are needed for loading and testing.

Pharo, building on top of PharoCore in a similar way as  Pharo (dev/web) does?  I wouldn't think the Squeak team is willing to handover the "core" to Pharo, otherwise there would never have been a Pharo project in the first place .... or am I barking up the wrong tree?

The Pharo team never asked for the opportunity to develop the new version of squeak if they had submitted a proposal at the time, I am sure it would have been considered.  However they didn't want to be involved in the politics, and I cant say I blame them.

 Anyhow, better package management and code sharing (simpler) would be great :)

Sake/Packages was available a year ago.

I could commet in a detail on things which i don't agree with you, but i don't want to repeat myself. Words already been said (multiple times) and if you would want to listen, you will hear. But you seem simply not listening or just ignoring. And then don't you think that you not better than others, who not willing to listen, but feel offended that nobody seem wants to listen them? Such attitude makes any compromise impossible & futile. And, Keith, each time you start blaming someone, ask yourself, what makes you better than others and gives you the right to judge people and their decisions, putting a labels on them and finally blame for things what they never did. Listen and be heard(c)

Keith _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

2009/12/16 keith <keith_hodges@yahoo.co.uk> [screed deleted]

I am no longer in a position to effect things either way, since I have been unable due circumstances to write a single line of code since the squeak board acted as they did. Ranting is all I have left that I can do.

Law 9 WIN THROUGH YOUR ACTIONS, NEVER THROUGH ARGUMENT *Any momentary triumph you think you have gained through argument is really a Pyrric victory: The resentment and ill will you stir up is stronger and lasts longer than any momentary change of opinion. It is much more powerful to get others to agree with you through your actions, without saying a word. Demonstrate, do not explicate*.

On Dec 17, 2009, at 2:04 PM, keith wrote:

On 17 Dec 2009, at 06:44, Eliot Miranda wrote:

...

2009/12/16 keith <keith_hodges@yahoo.co.uk> [screed deleted] I am no longer in a position to effect things either way, since I have been unable due circumstances to write a single line of code since the squeak board acted as they did. Ranting is all I have left that I can do.

Law 9 WIN THROUGH YOUR ACTIONS, NEVER THROUGH ARGUMENT Any momentary triumph you think you have gained through argument is really a Pyrric victory: The resentment and ill will you stir up is stronger and lasts longer than any momentary change of opinion. It is much more powerful to get others to agree with you through your actions, without saying a word. Demonstrate, do not explicate. _____________________________________________

My actions are there for all to see, I acted until I am blue in the face. I am the only person who made an active contribution to the development of the corporate squeak vision since Dec 2006 (3.10 was only a bug fixing release, nothing visionary)

I confirm that

When actions run out you have but a shell left. Let me put it another way... If I died on August 20th what would have happened to my work?

Keith _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

**sorry guys it may be long to read but I wrote it also for you the lurkers :)** Keith some people may decide to ignore and frankly I cannot because I ***UNDERSTAND*** your frustration and I do not know what to do. So I reply because I consider you human and I know that you and me have the same vision for a build system.

I am not better than others, I can't work without others. It is precisely because I need the contribution of others that I am so pissed off with people for splitting up the community we used to have. Particularly the Pharo team for explicitly choosing NOT to participate or use ANY shared community projects that have been ongoing for 3/4 years, when those projects were originally conceived with the same goals as pharo in mind. Half of those projects were Stefanes idea in the first place at a time when he said he didn't have time to do any coding (2006-7) Rio is a prime example, as was interest in SSpec, I need other members of the team to test and feedback on my work, but that teamwork is NOT available, because of the NIH attitude demonstrated by several parties who will not in any circumstance contribute to any externally organized project but insist on working as individuals or as cliques.

Keith people have different agenda. I ***understand*** your frustration. Now contrary to most people I did a look at rio (I read it several times in fact) I did a look at Installer. I was pushing it (ask jannik I forced him gently to write a chapter on it). I did a look at sake but could not turn my head around (I should have see the videos before). Now I ***manage*** a team of 9 people during the day. I have to write fucking proposal. My agenda today is 8h30 meeting 9 h30 meeting with RH 12-14 guess what meeting for hiring 14-18 meeting as team head with the others. this is not everyday like that but the other days are - pushing PhD - brainstorming on our research = nothing to do with pharo - writing deliverables - writing projects to get money - fighting to be able to finish coding small stuff ....... Now we created pharo because we could not breath in Squeak. We had enough of insult, bashing, people talking all the time. Pharo is a vision: better infrastructure to change the world! What I suggest is that either you join or you will be ignored and your frustration will grow.

Do you think I have a clue what I am doing when I write something like Sake? No I haven't got a clue, I have never even understood how 'make' works. So I have a go, I learn on the job, sake is on iteration 2.5 as it is, and it would be nice to have some help, I look forward to others joining in and being community to help were I am weak. However what do those others do, they do their own thing because they are too elitist and hotshot to consider contributing to an existing public project that couldn't possibly be worthy of their esteemed input.

Some people prefer to do their own. They have this luxury. I do not have it. I'm rewriting packageInfo and it is taking a lot of time Now Pharo is not against what you do. Read my previous answers to you.

Installer is an OPEN community project, I did version 1, Matthew did most of version 2. Along comes Gofer with some new ideas, does gofer contribute to the community supporting vision of a unified extendable DSL for installing things, or does it compete?

But lukas has the right to do something that he prefers. You can commit to his repository there is no problem.

Do you think that Bob could have benefitted from Colins experience? I think it could. Why is it acceptable for me to spend $30k of my own time and resources developing something as a project for the community to contribute to and participate in, only to have it flushed down the toliet by someone who is being paid a packet, and can't even be bothered to email out a question like "does Bob do this already?", or "can I help?". Same goes for Dale, he is being paid to do this stuff, so is Stef and Marcus.

Oh NO!!! We are NOT PAID to do pharo. Don't dream. Pharo is not my job. My wife is asking me why I do it believe me. Because my research would be probably easier in Ruby or Lua. We do pharo because we want a better substrate for our research. May be we are fool and should do it in Python. If we would be paid we would go MUCH faster to change pharo. May be squeakers are paid but we are not.

I always use other peoples stuff. Everything I do uses other people's stuff, I have always fixed bugs and fed back every problem I have ever found, contributing to their projects as best I can. If I have an idea I look to see if anyone else is doing it and I seek to contribute to that project not to compete with it. I choose to enter dialog, simply because it is easier if someone else has already done the work. Every contribution that I have made has been for the benefit of everyone else, and built on the work of others, and I have sacrificed a lot of paid work to make those contributions. Every contribution I have ever made has been aimed for use by all users of squeak/pharo whatever the image they are currently stuck using, even if it is 3.7. Most of the audience here and over on squeak-dev is only developing for one image and one set of users, so perhaps I do have the moral high ground here, and I feel I may be joined here by the likes of Nick Cellier who has also been contributing equally for everyone.

We are not against other but we do not believe that a solution should work to any forks. Now apparently andreas wants competition: I think that this is not good but what can we do? I will not discuss wrong arguments about why pharo could be use as a basis for squeak (pharo goals is to be small and flexible and frankly this would be simpler to have a multimedia layer on top of it. Apparently what we did is so trivial that they can redo it. Perfect to me. We will continue to build our vision. Peeble by peebles...

Now if I can make numerous contributions for 4 years that everyone can use, such as Rio, Logging, Sake, Sake/Packages, Installer, MC1.5, Bob, Sake/Scheduler, Jetsam, Beach etc then with a minor modicum of thought so can everyone else on some projects at least. For example HTTPClient, Network, Collections, NewCompiler, Preferences, DS, changes, closures etc. This partisan politics of pharo camps, squeak camps, is all utter rubbish. It is laziness, simply because no one can be bothered to talk to each other, or to plan what they are doing, or to define an API, and no one in charge has the backbone or political will to say "We will contribute to, and use this project X as a common resource for all".

Come on there was nobody beside you and matthew was doing anything in squeak when we started pharo. We got bashed and insulted by people after 3.9 so why would we like to talk with people that do not consider us (or only like shit). For me Squeak was over.

Effort is needed to develop integration and testing servers that would underpin such approaches and this is needed upfront in advance of relentless image hacking. (Bob2 was essentially finished in February 2009) That was the basis of the proposal to the squeak board you know all about, that the board has subsequently abandoned, so now the squeak release team is also now only developing for their own clique. Pharo or Squeak progress isn't planned, you can't tell me what Stefane or Andreas is going to announce next! This isn't really software engineering, it is hacking about reminiscent of what we used to do as schoolboys.

We wrote our next milestones check adrian blog (we plan to move it to the project site)

I thought that if you want to plan you make an announcement, like we used to do. "We want to move such and such a feature forward, the repository is here, would you like to join us". What I want to know is why when someone attempts to say "We will open up project X as a common resource for all" the default reaction is not to contribute but to compete and start your own project?

Adrian did one for 1.1 Alien or FFI + external package management + beta of new compiler Of course we are not directly working on that but soon we will start

When in 2006 the consensus opinion is that progress was needed I decided to volunteer in some small way. Recognizing that the image needed to move towards a kernel image, one small step, I started with some small projects. I have 32 years programming experience, and I have been using SUnit since 1999ish, my first project ran to 2000 tests in ST/X so I know a little bit about how SUnit could be improved with the ability to categorize tests. I am not some fresh faced coder from graduate school, I felt that if anyone was qualified to make a small contribution to SUnit I was. So we announced some ideas, and made everything public and open for contributions we moved SUnit into a separate repository (squeaksource/Testing) and looked towards combining it with SSpec, we added lots of new features for categorizing tests and a file output based TestReporter which generates results for http display and download using apache. We also added hooks to invoke tests suites from the command line.

This was offered as the planned community way forward for SUnit in Sept 2006ish FOR EVERYONE as encouraged by Stefane in the first place and at the time it all worked reasonably well in squeak 3.9.

So then stefane starts Pharo and the pharo team ignore squeaksource/Testing completely and their fresh faced graduate students start making things incompatible, they are actively UNDERMINING all progress that had been made.

you are losing credibility... I already said that we should have a look at SUnit. I do not really decide. Now nobody ever said yes this is cool let us use it. We have no feeling about that besides urgency related to time. Now give me one engineer and this will be different!

This isn't just rude, this is patently hostile to any efforts to enable collaboration to happen. It also completely scuppers me because I need the input of others particularly experienced Pharo people contributing to the team in order for it to function. MC1.6 atomic loading needed pharo input to be able to load traits, and that input never happened, and never could happen, because pharo began using a MC that was 2 years behind. This is basically an approach which is destructive to the community, and it is a result of political decision making, whether to support a project as an external resource for everyone to use, or whether to act like control freaks and to retain ownership of a package, (and break it for everyone else) that we really need to be developed for the benefit of all as a matter of importance to be common between all squeak/pharo camps.

So then finally to add insult to injury the processes adopted by both the Squeak and Pharo communities effectively shut out every contribution I have made, not least because all of my contributions are supposed to be for both. For example, my contribution to Squeak is to restructure some packages, in particular Monticello and PackageInfo. Now you try loading a restructured set of packages into the trunk repository. It wont work because the trunk process starts with the MC tools loaded and the package structure already decided, not least of which is the problem that MC cant load a new version of MC into itself. So I spend 3 months of effort working on that problem (LevelPlayingField), for what? Anyhow the net result is a process which effectively to shut out my contribution that I spent a lot of time and resources on. Thanks for that!

Having a process that could harness everyones contributions was a key philosophical starting point. You have to start any project with your philosophical values, and build on that. You cannot jump ship on your values without causing major upheaval. That is what happened, Andreas explicitly replaced the process that was designed to enable fundamental and important changes to happen in a planned manner with a process that makes such contributions completely impossible. While Elliot is talking about the need to build up an image from a minimal source/kernel, others are talking about reducing the image to a kernel, along comes Andreas and proposes a process based around a monolithic image. It's lunatic stuff it really is.

Indeed. To collaborate we should be two and trust each others. We spent too many days with some squeak big names to want to avoid that as much as possible. Once you get burned once you try to think twice. I will not argue. I talk to you because I respect you even when you are mad at me :) I do not talk to others because this is simply useless.

So yes I judge people, when you make decisions that effect other people without consulting them, I think its fair to speak up. Stefane was the one in 2006 listing what features squeak definitely needed, so when I got to work I think it is the least he could do, to build on this work rather than compete with it.

Our decision was not competition. I was ok let us take what we know and do something. Probably not clever and more a survival reaction.

I used to believe that the only hope for this squeak/pharo community was for there to be a "sensible and thoughtful" squeak-dev development team following on 6-12 months behind the "forge right on ahead and innovate at all costs" pharo team. This was really only possible if pharo used common tools, which the pharo team point blank refused to do. I thought we could work around this in the short term, and pharo team would eventually see sense, being wowed by the effectiveness of Bob and the new release often process cycle. But now we have a "forge on ahead" without tools squeak-dev team as well, the joint community thing is not ever going to happen.

keith I think that one key aspect is that we should meet. ESUG this year will have free entry slot. Request one and come.

While we have a squeak-board process that allows a newly elected person who hasn't been making any recent contributions himself to the community to then scupper 3 years of consistent beneficial work without even discussing his plans with those it effects, and the board then spouts "the end justifies the means", when it doesn't even know what the end is going to be. The squeak world is really broken because it is institutionally unpredictable and I really advise people to stay well clear.

I really understand your frustration and we left also because of that kind of attitude. Remember we did (me marcus goran mike) the first foundation.

I will probably use pharo for future work now, just because I will have to use something. I might look into returning to lovely peaceful professional world of ST/X that I am beginning to miss. I am withdrawing my personal input to any of my contributions that does not contribute in some way to the bottom line, I simply cannot afford not to. I am also a full time carer, so I cant just earn nothing indefinitely. If I had time and income I might be persuaded to be nice, document stuff and play the competition game for a bit. I never wanted to compete, and I refuse to compete, all I ever wanted was for people to work together and contribute.

Yes I understand that. But it does not work to have a solution working for all the forks.

Work on 3.11 and Bob stopped the instant that Andreas announced his competing approach, because I don't have any will to compete, this isn't a competition, we are supposed to be collaborating and communicating on a professional basis of mutual respect. lol

Although Bob is finished and operational, I won't make any further contribution until that contribution is towards an actual vision of benefit to the community. While Andreas is competing with pharo, his vision is not helpful to anyone, while pharo's vision is to ignore everyone else, their vision is not helpful either.

We do not ignore. We evaluate and sometimes it takes too much time. I was really thorn apart about rio because I like part of it and other I dont; like the law of demeter style. You know it. I know that you remove the Null Pattern. So our goal is not to be arrogant sometimes taking decision is difficult.

The previous squeak 3.11 vision was purposefully orthogonal to the pharo one, and so the two would have been able to fit together with the minimal of effort.

yes!

If someone wants to support the vision of continuing to develop tools that we can use to bring the communities together then we stand a chance of moving forward and I would be happy to advise, but I am unable to contribute to this vision any further for financial reasons.

I understand.

So to answer your questions... yes I think I can judge because at least I have made an effort to contribute and harmonize all along.

Yes and this is why I reply to you. Silence would be horrible in this case.

As far as listening is concerned there is nothing I can do. I no longer have any resources to do anything with what I hear.

My ranting merely serves to inform those who want to compete rather than to contribute that they have won by default by walking over everything that has gone before. I can't compete, so you have a choice, you either use the extensive work which with has been done on your behalf or you throw it away.

We do not want to compete. I do not understand why people can neglect the work with started in May 2008 and want to kill us. Now what can I do? We will really make sure that we will be hard to kill because our vision is really important.

I am no longer in a position to effect things either way, since I have been unable due circumstances to write a single line of code since the squeak board acted as they did. Ranting is all I have left that I can do.

Get a job. Did you saw the job offers of JPMorgan.

sorry

I'm too.

Keith

_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

keith I think that one key aspect is that we should meet. ESUG this year will have free entry slot. Request one and come.

+10000 Then we organize a "workshop". I wish Matthew could join too ! -- Cédrick

On Dec 17, 2009, at 12:13 PM, Cédrick Béler wrote:

keith I think that one key aspect is that we should meet. ESUG this year will have free entry slot. Request one and come.

all the sprints were always free access.

+10000

Then we organize a "workshop". I wish Matthew could join too !

-- Cédrick _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

On Dec 17, 2009, at 2:14 PM, keith wrote:

Stef,

I don't think you understand.

You had access to the repository squeakfoundation.org/39a, you the privileged elite, release teams etc could contribute to the head of SUnit, it was a closed project. squeaksource.com/Testing was proposed as the new head of SUnit, it is not for anyone to say let's use this its really cool. It is not something to be adopted if it is cool or not. It is the head of the community development that is SUnit. If it is not cool, then squeaksource.com/Testing is the place to go to fix it.

It doesnt matter whether the code in squeaksource.com/Testing is rubbish,

No you take responsibilities for a choice.

it was important to adopt it as an exercise in recognizing and supporting the communities efforts to make progress rather than to undermine them. To carry on using the version that is in the closed repository only did one thing, that was to undermine the input that went into the "head" project at squeaksource.com/Testing, and it sent the message out that contributions are not wanted.

You say you are rewriting PackageInfo, you could have rewritten the version that is in MC1.5, and built on what was going before.

No I'm rewriting from scratch. A real package not based on conventions. There are too much behavior in the existing one. But people may use what I'm doing or not. Before this is not working I have to shut up.

Keith

_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Anyhow, in reference to my comment to Eliot, my smalltalk contribution life died on the day Andreas took over squeak-dev, he with the help of the board murdered it. And I am afraid that it might be for good. This is probably a good thing because it was sucking up too much time and effort. It is a shame that the Bob based squeak 3.11 building process was actually complete, with automated testing demonstration within a day or so of completion. Bob is all there if you want it. If you had loaded squeaksource/Testing and contributed to it, and if you had loaded MC1.5 LevelPlayingField right from the start then perhaps I might be contributing to pharo now. However I do have other things to do, in my time as a full time carer I have discovered a cure for rape trauma, tourettes, and many other severe mental illnesses, so my time will be better spend continuing that research and documenting it. For example last year, I saw paranoid schizophrenia healed in a 20 minute counseling-like session. So applying a sense of perspective to the whole thing, who cares about a few bytes here and there, when you really do have an opportunity to change the world. There may be some books out in the next 5 years or so. I also need to raise a couple of million pounds to fund a rehabilitation facility for sufferers of Multiple Personality Disorder, my current specialism. so signing off Keith

On Dec 17, 2009, at 2:27 PM, keith wrote:

...

You say you are rewriting PackageInfo, you could have rewritten the version that is in MC1.5, and built on what was going before.

For example, do you have support for files in MC? No

do you have support for Package types?

I have no idea what is a package types. I have no idea about orphanage. (you see I read the code)

do you have Matthew's extra wizzy iteration code?

If you had simply said, we will load LevelPlayingField and fix things there, this would have been a different story altogether. You insist on making things hard for yourself, then you complain that you have no time to do things properly.

But you know like me that MC is central for us and that we did not want to load code that brings in extra stuff. So I started to look at the speed up code and published three months ago some package in the inbox and nobody looked at it. Stef

2009/12/17 keith <keith_hodges@yahoo.co.uk>:

I could commet in a detail on things which i don't agree with you, but i don't want to repeat myself. Words already been said (multiple times) and if you would want to listen, you will hear. But you seem simply not listening or just ignoring. And then don't you think that you not better than others, who not willing to listen, but feel offended that nobody seem wants to listen them? Such attitude makes any compromise impossible & futile. And, Keith, each time you start blaming someone, ask yourself, what makes you better than others

I am not better than others, I can't work without others. It is precisely because I need the contribution of others that I am so pissed off with people for splitting up the community we used to have. Particularly the Pharo team for explicitly choosing NOT to participate or use ANY shared community projects that have been ongoing for 3/4 years, when those projects were originally conceived with the same goals as pharo in mind. Half of those projects were Stefanes idea in the first place at a time when he said he didn't have time to do any coding (2006-7) Rio is a prime example, as was interest in SSpec, I need other members of the team to test and feedback on my work, but that teamwork is NOT available, because of the NIH attitude demonstrated by several parties who will not in any circumstance contribute to any externally organized project but insist on working as individuals or as cliques. Colin cites that his reason for not considering Bob as an option is that Bob requires Sake in the image to be built which it doesn't. He then defines a set of requirements for Mason which are EXACTLY THE SAME as those which Bob had, since Bob 1 was written in ruby in Jan 2007. Mason defines a hierarchy of build targets with dependencies?, hmm dependencies where have I heard that word before, oh yes Metacello, Universes, SM3, Sake/Packages and what framework was developed as a minimal implementation of a dependency structure, Sake. Why didn't Colin use Bob? Why didn't Mason use Sake? Why didnt metacello consider Sake, or SM3 consider Sake, it smells somewhat of "not invented here". Do you think I have a clue what I am doing when I write something like Sake? No I haven't got a clue, I have never even understood how 'make' works. So I have a go, I learn on the job, sake is on iteration 2.5 as it is, and it would be nice to have some help, I look forward to others joining in and being community to help were I am weak. However what do those others do, they do their own thing because they are too elitist and hotshot to consider contributing to an existing public project that couldn't possibly be worthy of their esteemed input. Installer is an OPEN community project, I did version 1, Matthew did most of version 2. Along comes Gofer with some new ideas, does gofer contribute to the community supporting vision of a unified extendable DSL for installing things, or does it compete? Before you accuse me of judging, I never said that Sake was technically perfect, but it was there FIRST as an open community project for anyone and everyone to contribute to, so was squeaksource/Testing and MC1.5 these were all the first OPEN to all contributor projects. We were not proud, we would like to have contributors helping, (that would perhaps help me to develop the commercial side of my business  a bit, instead I go bankrupt), so with Sake there is an OPEN project interested in providing a framework for supporting dependent tasks. Given a choice of contributing or competing, the choice appears always to be to compete. This is not good in my opinion and it has to change. Obviously I am not the one to change it because I get too hot under the collar and I can't do politics. This is why Matthew was the 3.11 release team leader officially, as the political leader, to protect me from my own ineptitude at politics, hmm, it didn't quite work did it. Do you think that Bob could have benefitted from Colins experience? I think it could. Why is it acceptable for me to spend $30k of my own time and resources developing something as a project for the community to contribute to and participate in, only to have it flushed down the toliet by someone who is being paid a packet, and can't even be bothered to email out a question like "does Bob do this already?", or "can I help?". Same goes for Dale, he is being paid to do this stuff, so is Stef and Marcus. Whereas every hour I spend on this work for the benefit of the community costs me in time I could have spent on paid work, I am not even just a volunteer, I am actually paying to contribute to these projects that no one wants. What is particularly upsetting is when the board say they want it, and vote on and approve written proposals to that effect. Come to think about it I think that the squeak-board and Andreas owe me about $30k in compensation for wasted effort. I always use other peoples stuff. Everything I do uses other people's stuff, I have always fixed bugs and fed back every problem I have ever found, contributing to their projects as best I can. If I have an idea I look to see if anyone else is doing it and I seek to contribute to that project not to compete with it. I choose to enter dialog, simply because it is easier if someone else has already done the work. Every contribution that I have made has been for the benefit of everyone else, and built on the work of others, and I have sacrificed a lot of paid work to make those contributions. Every contribution I have ever made has been aimed for use by all users of squeak/pharo whatever the image they are currently stuck using, even if it is 3.7. Most of the audience here and over on squeak-dev is only developing for one image and one set of users, so perhaps I do have the moral high ground here, and I feel I may be joined here by the likes of Nick Cellier who has also been contributing equally for everyone. Now if I can make numerous contributions for 4 years that everyone can use, such as Rio, Logging, Sake, Sake/Packages, Installer, MC1.5, Bob, Sake/Scheduler, Jetsam, Beach etc then with a minor modicum of thought so can everyone else on some projects at least. For example HTTPClient, Network, Collections, NewCompiler, Preferences, DS, changes, closures etc. This partisan politics of pharo camps, squeak camps, is all utter rubbish. It is laziness, simply because no one can be bothered to talk to each other, or to plan what they are doing, or to define an API, and no one in charge has the backbone or political will to say "We will contribute to, and use this project X as a common resource for all". Effort is needed to develop integration and testing servers that would underpin such approaches and this is needed upfront in advance of relentless image hacking. (Bob2 was essentially finished in February 2009) That was the basis of the proposal to the squeak board you know all about, that the board has subsequently abandoned, so now the squeak release team is also now only developing for their own clique. Pharo or Squeak progress isn't planned, you can't tell me what Stefane or Andreas is going to announce next! This isn't really software engineering, it is hacking about reminiscent of what we used to do as schoolboys. What happened to release early and often that the Smalltalk community invented. Where are the CRC cards and the prioritization, what is the working rate of the team etc. We are supposed to be the elite, knowledgeable in Extreme programming techniques, well Pharo isn't releasing on a monthly cycle, and Squeak certainly isn't. I cant tell my bosses what features will be coming online in the next 3 months that we could plan to use. With Andreas' contribution Squeak would have started with bi-monthly releases in August, we would have been working on Squeak 3.13-beta by now if Andreas hadn't butted in with his old style hack away, wait a year or two for a release of I know not what, methods. I thought that if you want to plan you make an announcement, like we used to do. "We want to move such and such a feature forward, the repository is here, would you like to join us". What I want to know is why when someone attempts to say "We will open up project X as a common resource for all" the default reaction is not to contribute but to compete and start your own project? When in 2006 the consensus opinion is that progress was needed I decided to volunteer in some small way. Recognizing that the image needed to move towards a kernel image, one small step, I started with some small projects. I have 32 years programming experience, and I have been using SUnit since 1999ish, my first project ran to 2000 tests in ST/X so I know a little bit about how SUnit could be improved with the ability to categorize tests. I am not some fresh faced coder from graduate school, I felt that if anyone was qualified to make a small contribution to SUnit I was. So we announced some ideas, and made everything public and open for contributions we moved SUnit into a separate repository (squeaksource/Testing) and looked towards combining it with SSpec, we added lots of new features for categorizing tests and a file output based TestReporter which generates results for http display and download using apache. We also added hooks to invoke tests suites from the command line. This was offered as the planned community way forward for SUnit in Sept 2006ish FOR EVERYONE as encouraged by Stefane in the first place and at the time it all worked reasonably well in squeak 3.9. So then stefane starts Pharo and the pharo team ignore squeaksource/Testing completely and their fresh faced graduate students start making things incompatible, they are actively UNDERMINING all progress that had been made. This isn't just rude, this is patently hostile to any efforts to enable collaboration to happen. It also completely scuppers me because I need the input of others particularly experienced Pharo people contributing to the team in order for it to function. MC1.6 atomic loading needed pharo input to be able to load traits, and that input never happened, and never could happen, because pharo began using a MC that was 2 years behind. This is basically an approach which is destructive to the community, and it is a result of political decision making, whether to support a project as an external resource for everyone to use, or whether to act like control freaks and to retain ownership of a package, (and break it for everyone else) that we really need to be developed for the benefit of all as a matter of importance to be common between all squeak/pharo camps. I have volunteered since July 2006 in an active manner. Much of this was at the suggestion of Stefane who made some proposals as to what was needed at the time. So I was encouraged by stefane to move some things forward. So... when after moving things forward in squeaksource/Testing and making it completely loadable, Stefane and gang then choose to use as a starting point the status of things in 3.9, without considering the input of anyone that had contributed in the intervening period of almost 2 years, I got annoyed and I remain annoyed, because it was his idea in the first place, and his vision that I did the work for in the first place. Did Andreas build on the status of 3.11 (3.10-build) when he took over, or did he start from a starting point 3 years back? Now you have people saying that they don't see any progress in squeak for umpteen years do you wonder why? Pointing out decisions that have explicit effects is not judging. So then finally to add insult to injury the processes adopted by both the Squeak and Pharo communities effectively shut out every contribution I have made, not least because all of my contributions are supposed to be for both. For example, my contribution to Squeak is to restructure some packages, in particular Monticello and PackageInfo. Now you try loading a restructured set of packages into the trunk repository. It wont work because the trunk process starts with the MC tools loaded and the package structure already decided, not least of which is the problem that MC cant load a new version of MC into itself. So I spend 3 months of effort working on that problem (LevelPlayingField), for what? Anyhow the net result is a process which effectively to shut out my contribution that I spent a lot of time and resources on. Thanks for that!

Having a process that could harness everyones contributions was a key philosophical starting point. You have to start any project with your philosophical values, and build on that. You cannot jump ship on your values without causing major upheaval. That is what happened, Andreas explicitly replaced the process that was designed to enable fundamental and important changes to happen in a planned manner with a process that makes such contributions completely impossible. While Elliot is talking about the need to build up an image from a minimal source/kernel, others are talking about reducing the image to a kernel, along comes Andreas and proposes a process based around a monolithic image. It's lunatic stuff it really is.

This is a fallacy. What Andreas did is enabled contributions to flow into the trunk. In random order, and touching random places/packages, and with minimally possible systematical approach YES. But that what intent primarily was: enabling a simplest possible way(s) to contribute. Random and chaotical. This is the nature of any open-source community where you don't have businness plans, milestones and project manager watching over mob of programmer-slaves to doing their job & sticking to the plan. You can't tell a enthusiast developer what to do and how to do it. You can only hope, that he is motivated enough to do anything, as well as you can only hope that he likes the tools you made and using them, producing some feedback and helping you improve them etc etc. Embracing a stream of random contributions , putting an order where chaos is, is a completely separate task. It may be difficult, and we may not having a proper tools for that yet, but its doable, especially by tools built by you. So this is my source of disappointment: you had something that you may offer to community in this regard, maybe not ready yet, but still, having a good vision how process should look like. But instead, right at the moment, where your advice & contributions was needed most, you choose to quit because of some far-fetched reasons and started bashing everyone, how stupid, evil and cruel they are. So, lets summarize - multiple people told you multiple times that: - allowing people to contribute in whatever fashion they prefer and - building a useful artifact from these contributions is two separate processes. But you don't want to listen, and instead repeating over and over again (didn't you tired yet?), that Andreas undermined your job and sacked it altogether. So, ask yourself, what conclusion people making from this about you?

So yes I judge people, when you make decisions that effect other people without consulting them, I think its fair to speak up. Stefane was the one in 2006 listing what features squeak definitely needed, so when I got to work I think it is the least he could do, to build on this work rather than compete with it. I used to believe that the only hope for this squeak/pharo community was for there to be a "sensible and thoughtful" squeak-dev development team following on 6-12 months behind the "forge right on ahead and innovate at all costs" pharo team. This was really only possible if pharo used common tools, which the pharo team point blank refused to do. I thought we could work around this in the short term, and pharo team would eventually see sense, being wowed by the effectiveness of Bob and the new release often process cycle.  But now we have a "forge on ahead" without tools squeak-dev team as well, the joint community thing is not ever going to happen. While we have a squeak-board process that allows a newly elected person who hasn't been making any recent contributions himself to the community to then scupper 3 years of consistent beneficial work without even discussing his plans with those it effects, and the board then spouts "the end justifies the means", when it doesn't even know what the end is going to be. The squeak world is really broken because it is institutionally unpredictable and I really advise people to stay well clear. I will probably use pharo for future work now, just because I will have to use something. I might look into returning to lovely peaceful professional world of ST/X that I am beginning to miss.  I am withdrawing my personal input to any of my contributions that does not contribute in some way to the bottom line, I simply cannot afford not to. I am also a full time carer, so I cant just earn nothing indefinitely. If I had time and income I might be persuaded to be nice, document stuff and play the competition game for a bit. I never wanted to compete, and I refuse to compete, all I ever wanted was for people to work together and contribute. Work on 3.11 and Bob stopped the instant that Andreas announced his competing approach, because I don't have any will to compete, this isn't a competition, we are supposed to be collaborating and communicating on a professional basis of mutual respect. lol Although Bob is finished and operational, I won't make any further contribution until that contribution is towards an actual vision of benefit to the community. While Andreas is competing with pharo, his vision is not helpful to anyone, while pharo's vision is to ignore everyone else, their vision is not helpful either. The previous squeak 3.11 vision was purposefully orthogonal to the pharo one, and so the two would have been able to fit together with the minimal of effort. If someone wants to support the vision of continuing to develop tools that we can use to bring the communities together then we stand a chance of moving forward and I would be happy to advise, but I am unable to contribute to this vision any further for financial reasons. So to answer your questions... yes I think I can judge because at least I have made an effort to contribute and harmonize all along. As far as listening is concerned there is nothing I can do. I no longer have any resources to do anything with what I hear. My ranting merely serves to inform those who want to compete rather than to contribute that they have won by default by walking over everything that has gone before. I can't compete, so you have a choice, you either use the extensive work which with has been done on your behalf or you throw it away. I am no longer in a position to effect things either way, since I have been unable due circumstances to write a single line of code since the squeak board acted as they did.

Keith, i sharing many of your vision(s) and really like the Installer (the only tool which i used so far). And as well as you, i don't understand, why people don't even want to take a look at Sake/Installer. But who i am to tell people what they should use and what not? If Colin wants to build own dependency-managing system, why not? I don't see it as a competition to your work. Maybe his goal were is to build it from scratch by own, instead of using ready-made solution(s) and by doing this, learn something new and find out, how complex the problem domain is, and what solutions is best for it. 'not invented here' syndrome is not the only answer why people time to time prefer to implement something from scratch.

Ranting is all I have left that I can do.

This is counterproductive. You offending far many people by doing this. I prefer to always keep doors open for everyone. I think that people deserve a second (third,fourth) chance. And personally, i was quite frustrated seeing you hastily burning all bridges, especially when you spent a huge amount of time contributing to squeak, instead of trying to solve all tensions politely.

sorry Keith

_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

...

However they didn't want to be involved in the politics, and I cant say I blame them.

So let's see, what where our options last year? 1. Take over Squeak (just like Andreas did now) 2. Just step aside and do a fork. 3. Nicely ask to be involved with 3.11 1) was not possible. In 3.9, both Stef and me where in the Board. (We should not that we foundet it...) But Stef left in disgust as it became clear the people there were not willing to do *anything*. And I did not seek re-election after the community made it clear that they did not like our work on 3.9. (and there was a PhD Thesis to write...) As for 3: the community chose you to do 3.11! And it was made clear to us that we did everything wrong with 3.9. And everyone seemed happy to do what Squeakers do best: Discuss while doing nothing. The other thing then is etoys... we put some effort into etoys in 3.9 (merge with squeakland.org, merge with Diego's SmallLand which was the largest etoy installation at that point). But no child ever used it. There was no interaction with the people who worked (payed!!) on etoys *at all*. And it was clear that an etoys in Pharo would never be used. So why keep it? Especially as etoys is really not easy to maintain. (I personally rate it as unmaintainable. It's a mess of epic proportion). It's not an asset. It's a liability. But Squeak without etoys is not Squeak. So another name is quite the right thing to do, no? Than, why do we need something like Pharo anyway? The reason is that we used Squeak it *every* *single* *day*. We used Squeak for teaching, we used it do do research. Phd Students used it, Master Students used it. People that left the university started to use it in their company. So, I am a Researcher, and my point of view of "Why Pharo" is this: Doing Research is like exploring a mountain. A high mountain, the peak is covered in clouds, no idea where exactly it is an just how high the peak is... yet it's there. And you *want* to get there. So what would you do in this situation? There are four approaches: 1) Talk about The Peak, but don't do anything until someone invents a magical peak discovery device. 2) Go up. As far as you can. Do not waste time with acquiring good equipment, do not build camps. (building a camps is not your goal! the peak is!) 3) Go up. But while doing it, start to note how to improve your equipment. Seek good spots for putting up camps and storage for food. You will not find the peak this time. But you have learned a lot. You know where to put a camp. You know how to stock it. You know what equipment would simplify the next try. So you spend some energy... and haul up stuff to the secure place and build a camp. For sure, the next expedition can go *far far* higher! 4) Just build equipment down in the valley. Don't go up before it's perfect! So, I don't know what you would do. I would do 3). It has some really boring components, this Plan 3. Hauling stuff up the mountain is not fun. It's not glorious. And there are no Sherpas to hire. In Research at the University, there are no engineers. The PhD-Students and Researchers need to cary everything themselves... not working together, not having fun together while doing will mean that you can't do it. So Pharo, up to now, is just that: Hauling equipment and food up the mountain to form a stabilized camp. It's not really that high. (other expeditions are laughing: "This is a trivial. What idiots. They have no Vision"). But they have *no camp* at all. And as soon as ours is ready, we rest, and than we build the next... and the next, and the next. Higher and Higher up. I always wonder how high we would already be (with lots of equipment and well-rested), if we would have used this strategy the last 10 years for Squeak. But we did not. VPRI is doing 2). The Squeak community prefers 1). Squeak 3.11 was 4). But I fear, the magic device will never be discovered... and Squeak died in 3.11 because there was no visible artifact. And starting all the time from the bottom is just not going to work (it did in the 70ties, when hills where small... Dan wrote a paper about it even... but with the mountains of today, no way...). So... back to haulin' more stuff.... Marcus -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de

PS: You must read "2000/12 - Kamigami no Itadaki - Le Sommet des Dieux" from jiro taniguchi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jiro_Taniguchi this is 1800 pages manga on alpinists and himalaya. I thought it would be dead boring but this is excellent. Once you french is ready you can lend it for free in the public library.

I love this Manga, it is simply amazing. One of the best Manga I've ever read. And probably the only comic I read before you :-p Lukas -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch

On 16 Dec 2009, at 07:15, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:

Guys let us continue build a shiny future this is more fun than ego problems. My goal with pharo is - to create a world where people can make a living with an open- source smalltalk. - make it credible to the outside world (you know python, ruby, lua, java....) - make sure that we can adapt to the future changes - be the substrate of people new inventions - learn and expand my knowledge

I am very happy that you guys are working on Pharo. I hope to be able to create shiny new inventions on top of that, contribute to the substrate when I can (hopefully not just by nagging at people ;-) ), and I am making publicity in multiple places. (AOSD conf demo of AspectMaps in Pharo coming up! )

PS: I should not have forwarded this mail, I was dreaming about a better world but it does not exist so let us continue

Many of us dream these things, that's why we are doing the work that we are doing. It's good to see that I am not alone in that, so yes you should send these kinds of mails. -- Johan Fabry jfabry@dcc.uchile.cl - http://dcc.uchile.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile

Em 16/12/2009 08:15, Stéphane Ducasse < stephane.ducasse@inria.fr > escreveu:

You are too meta for me :) What do you suggest in basic terms (yes this is too early for me but my brain is starting to work again).

Now just a point. The squeak archives is full of our history. Historians can go there and get the why we are here, what we did and what was the problem at that point. And I believe that they will really deeply understand. We only did one fork, some other did multiple ones but apparently they had the rights to do so. Newcomers can judge but may be they are wrong too :)

Guys let us continue build a shiny future this is more fun than ego problems. My goal with pharo is

- to create a world where people can make a living with an open-source smalltalk. - make it credible to the outside world (you know python, ruby, lua, java....) - make sure that we can adapt to the future changes - be the substrate of people new inventions - learn and expand my knowledge

Stef

PS: I should not have forwarded this mail, I was dreaming about a better world but it does not exist so let us continue

Stef,

From time to time have a message like this is not something you should shy away from, but instead send it as a leadership call.

Also, as Pharo is now a reality is no longer only a dream but a _vision_. As we're articulating on having funding, etc., it's becoming more than a vision but a _project_! my 0.019999.... -- Cesar Rabak