for those not in the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors mailing-list nor in esug
Iâm sorry to have to forward you this kind of mail but I do it. I will not send other emails on the topics. Stef Dear community On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com janko is kind of declaring that ESUG was not doing a good job managing GSOC. We feel insulted and we are quite concerned by that fact. Personally if students would not be involved I would vote that ESUG does not have anything to do with GSOC. Because it costs us money, time and stress. Note in addition that we never interferred with the choice or anything. I will ask the ESUG board to decide because we cannot do the job, spend time, money and be treated like that. Sorry! We are sad but this is like that. Then we do not like the kind of mails that Janko is sending us about the fact that ESUG is biased towards Pharo. Where are the research teams and teachers? Of course: the mails of janko are just so nice. I let you judge. It is particularly fun since this year we (the pharo board) decided not to organise a Pharo conference to avoid competing with ESUG.
About motivations for my proposal:
1. 'Smalltalk' is more recognizable name on first spot that 'ESUG' . And this matters when a student looks at around 150 GSoC organizations to choose, which one to check and try. See last year list of orgs.
2. ESUG is currently regarded by many as too biased towards Pharo. Let we avoid starting debating is this is true or not. Making our org more independent will I hope remove any remaining doubt about that.
I feel shocked and insulted but I take it easy, having success make you as easy target for jaleous people. This is strange that some people would prefer to have a non existing/moving open-source smalltalk. May be the losers theory. I added the answer of marcus below (because marcus usually is much calmer than me) so that Janko succeeded to get marcus reacting like that is a nice proof in itself. Seriously Smalltalk is in a so good shape in presence of lua, Javascript, ruby and python, clojure that we should fight. Excellent idea thank for this nice initiative. Stef Begin forwarded message:
From: Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@gmail.com> Subject: [gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name Date: 8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com Reply-To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com
Dear mentors,
I propose that we run this year GSoC simply under 'Smalltalk' name. Mentoring organization will be us mentors of past and current GSoCs, as the name 'mentoring organization' implies anyway. Such organization therefore doesn't need to be some kind of legal entity.
Because I need to open a new website and we have only one week to deadline, decision needs to be done soon.
Best regards Janko
--- Janko Mivšek Smalltalk GSoC Admin Team
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Smalltalk GSoC mentors" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Of course you need it: I filled out quite some paperwork for Google. ESUG is an official Google supplier, for that I filled american tax forms and so on. Without an organisation that will be very difficult. How do yu receive money for the flight if someone goes to the meeting in the fall? One of the reasons why the Smalltalk GSOC was accepted was I think that it was the same organisation that is already in the books of google. And I do not see why to change that: ESUG did a good job, we even lost money (that is, we spend more money on additional Summer of Code slots than got in with the money from google). We payed all additional expenses of the people going to the Summit: Google only pays the flight and hotel. Everyhting else not (e.g. going from the airpot to the hotel). What we need to discuss this year is if additional slots make sense: We had last year the fast that a) it was very expensive for ESUG b) even then, we got complaints that it was unfair that we did not pay the same as google c) that it was very extremely unfair that the student could not put âGoogle Summer of Codeâ on the CV. The last is the Killer: money from ESUG is just money. GSoC is more. So we ask if it is really worth to spend the money if even the students are not happy about it. And if your motivation behind is that this way you think it will be easier to enable âQuotasâ for different Smalltalks: I think this is a dumb idea. Yes, Pharo is very active. So could every other Smalltalk be, too. They just need to do it. If they do not, it is not my duty to limit my activity for âFairnessâ. Limiting the activity level of those who do to be more âin lineâ with what those do who do nothing is just *insane*. Itâs a description of death itself. Marcus
.. and of course my answer: Dear Smalltalkers, Stef is overreacting as always, going off-topic and don't want to see the real reasons behind this proposal. Which is to make GSoC attractive to all Smalltalkers by removing the last doubt about the any bias towards any Smalltalk or group. That's why I propose to go more independent under new name 'Smalltalk', besides a clearly better visibility of such name of course. I invite you to follow the debate on GSoC mentor list: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors All mentors with voting rights on past GSoCs please join back to this mailing list and help with debate: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/join Best regards Janko Dne 08. 02. 2014 10:53, piše Pharo4Stef:
Iâm sorry to have to forward you this kind of mail but I do it. I will not send other emails on the topics.
Stef
Dear community
On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> janko is kind of declaring that ESUG was not doing a good job managing GSOC. We feel insulted and we are quite concerned by that fact. Personally if students would not be involved I would vote that ESUG does not have anything to do with GSOC. Because it costs us money, time and stress. Note in addition that we never interferred with the choice or anything.
I will ask the ESUG board to decide because we cannot do the job, spend time, money and be treated like that. Sorry! We are sad but this is like that.
Then we do not like the kind of mails that Janko is sending us about the fact that ESUG is biased towards Pharo. Where are the research teams and teachers? Of course: the mails of janko are just so nice. I let you judge.
It is particularly fun since this year we (the pharo board) decided not to organise a Pharo conference to avoid competing with ESUG.
About motivations for my proposal:
1. 'Smalltalk' is more recognizable name on first spot that 'ESUG' . And this matters when a student looks at around 150 GSoC organizations to choose, which one to check and try. See last year list of orgs <http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org/list/public/google/gsoc2013>.
2. ESUG is currently regarded by many as too biased towards Pharo. Let we avoid starting debating is this is true or not. Making our org more independent will I hope remove any remaining doubt about that.
I feel shocked and insulted but I take it easy, having success make you as easy target for jaleous people. This is strange that some people would prefer to have a non existing/moving open-source smalltalk. May be the losers theory.
I added the answer of marcus below (because marcus usually is much calmer than me) so that Janko succeeded to get marcus reacting like that is a nice proof in itself.
Seriously Smalltalk is in a so good shape in presence of lua, Javascript, ruby and python, clojure that we should fight.
Excellent idea thank for this nice initiative.
Stef
Begin forwarded message:
*From: *Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@gmail.com <mailto:janko.mivsek@gmail.com>> *Subject: **[gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name* *Date: *8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 *To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> *Reply-To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com>
Dear mentors,
I propose that we run this year GSoC simply under 'Smalltalk' name. Mentoring organization will be us mentors of past and current GSoCs, as the name 'mentoring organization' implies anyway. Such organization therefore doesn't need to be some kind of legal entity.
Because I need to open a new website and we have only one week to deadline, decision needs to be done soon.
Best regards Janko
--- Janko Mivšek Smalltalk GSoC Admin Team
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Smalltalk GSoC mentors" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Of course you need it: I filled out quite some paperwork for Google. ESUG is an official Google supplier, for that I filled american tax forms and so on.
Without an organisation that will be very difficult. How do yu receive money for the flight if someone goes to the meeting in the fall?
One of the reasons why the Smalltalk GSOC was accepted was I think that it was the same organisation that is already in the books of google.
And I do not see why to change that: ESUG did a good job, we even lost money (that is, we spend more money on additional Summer of Code slots than got in with the money from google). We payed all additional expenses of the people going to the Summit: Google only pays the flight and hotel. Everyhting else not (e.g. going from the airpot to the hotel).
What we need to discuss this year is if additional slots make sense: We had last year the fast that a) it was very expensive for ESUG b) even then, we got complaints that it was unfair that we did not pay the same as google c) that it was very extremely unfair that the student could not put âGoogle Summer of Codeâ on the CV.
The last is the Killer: money from ESUG is just money. GSoC is more. So we ask if it is really worth to spend the money if even the students are not happy about it.
And if your motivation behind is that this way you think it will be easier to enable âQuotasâ for different Smalltalks: I think this is a dumb idea.
Yes, Pharo is very active. So could every other Smalltalk be, too. They just need to do it. If they do not, it is not my duty to limit my activity for âFairnessâ. Limiting the activity level of those who do to be more âin lineâ with what those do who do nothing is just *insane*. Itâs a description of death itself.
Marcus
-- Janko Mivšek Svetovalec za informatiko Eranova d.o.o. Ljubljana, Slovenija www.eranova.si tel: 01 514 22 55 faks: 01 514 22 56 gsm: 031 674 565
Janko in fact I'thinking about it may be this is the time to propose a Pharo specific GSOC program. If they are enough people willing to do that we have an association with a real legal status ready for that. :) thanks for giving us the idea. Stef On 08 Feb 2014, at 11:34, Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@eranova.si> wrote:
.. and of course my answer:
Dear Smalltalkers,
Stef is overreacting as always, going off-topic and don't want to see the real reasons behind this proposal. Which is to make GSoC attractive to all Smalltalkers by removing the last doubt about the any bias towards any Smalltalk or group. That's why I propose to go more independent under new name 'Smalltalk', besides a clearly better visibility of such name of course.
I invite you to follow the debate on GSoC mentor list:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors
All mentors with voting rights on past GSoCs please join back to this mailing list and help with debate:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/join
Best regards Janko
Dne 08. 02. 2014 10:53, piše Pharo4Stef:
Iâm sorry to have to forward you this kind of mail but I do it. I will not send other emails on the topics.
Stef
Dear community
On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> janko is kind of declaring that ESUG was not doing a good job managing GSOC. We feel insulted and we are quite concerned by that fact. Personally if students would not be involved I would vote that ESUG does not have anything to do with GSOC. Because it costs us money, time and stress. Note in addition that we never interferred with the choice or anything.
I will ask the ESUG board to decide because we cannot do the job, spend time, money and be treated like that. Sorry! We are sad but this is like that.
Then we do not like the kind of mails that Janko is sending us about the fact that ESUG is biased towards Pharo. Where are the research teams and teachers? Of course: the mails of janko are just so nice. I let you judge.
It is particularly fun since this year we (the pharo board) decided not to organise a Pharo conference to avoid competing with ESUG.
About motivations for my proposal:
1. 'Smalltalk' is more recognizable name on first spot that 'ESUG' . And this matters when a student looks at around 150 GSoC organizations to choose, which one to check and try. See last year list of orgs <http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org/list/public/google/gsoc2013>.
2. ESUG is currently regarded by many as too biased towards Pharo. Let we avoid starting debating is this is true or not. Making our org more independent will I hope remove any remaining doubt about that.
I feel shocked and insulted but I take it easy, having success make you as easy target for jaleous people. This is strange that some people would prefer to have a non existing/moving open-source smalltalk. May be the losers theory.
I added the answer of marcus below (because marcus usually is much calmer than me) so that Janko succeeded to get marcus reacting like that is a nice proof in itself.
Seriously Smalltalk is in a so good shape in presence of lua, Javascript, ruby and python, clojure that we should fight.
Excellent idea thank for this nice initiative.
Stef
Begin forwarded message:
*From: *Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@gmail.com <mailto:janko.mivsek@gmail.com>> *Subject: **[gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name* *Date: *8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 *To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> *Reply-To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com>
Dear mentors,
I propose that we run this year GSoC simply under 'Smalltalk' name. Mentoring organization will be us mentors of past and current GSoCs, as the name 'mentoring organization' implies anyway. Such organization therefore doesn't need to be some kind of legal entity.
Because I need to open a new website and we have only one week to deadline, decision needs to be done soon.
Best regards Janko
--- Janko Mivšek Smalltalk GSoC Admin Team
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Smalltalk GSoC mentors" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Of course you need it: I filled out quite some paperwork for Google. ESUG is an official Google supplier, for that I filled american tax forms and so on.
Without an organisation that will be very difficult. How do yu receive money for the flight if someone goes to the meeting in the fall?
One of the reasons why the Smalltalk GSOC was accepted was I think that it was the same organisation that is already in the books of google.
And I do not see why to change that: ESUG did a good job, we even lost money (that is, we spend more money on additional Summer of Code slots than got in with the money from google). We payed all additional expenses of the people going to the Summit: Google only pays the flight and hotel. Everyhting else not (e.g. going from the airpot to the hotel).
What we need to discuss this year is if additional slots make sense: We had last year the fast that a) it was very expensive for ESUG b) even then, we got complaints that it was unfair that we did not pay the same as google c) that it was very extremely unfair that the student could not put âGoogle Summer of Codeâ on the CV.
The last is the Killer: money from ESUG is just money. GSoC is more. So we ask if it is really worth to spend the money if even the students are not happy about it.
And if your motivation behind is that this way you think it will be easier to enable âQuotasâ for different Smalltalks: I think this is a dumb idea.
Yes, Pharo is very active. So could every other Smalltalk be, too. They just need to do it. If they do not, it is not my duty to limit my activity for âFairnessâ. Limiting the activity level of those who do to be more âin lineâ with what those do who do nothing is just *insane*. Itâs a description of death itself.
Marcus
-- Janko Mivšek Svetovalec za informatiko Eranova d.o.o. Ljubljana, Slovenija www.eranova.si tel: 01 514 22 55 faks: 01 514 22 56 gsm: 031 674 565
Dne 08. 02. 2014 11:40, piše Pharo4Stef:
Janko
in fact I'thinking about it may be this is the time to propose a Pharo specific GSOC program. If they are enough people willing to do that we have an association with a real legal status ready for that.
:) thanks for giving us the idea.
You can do that of course but then all will loose. Pharo will be regarded as a new organization and will get just few stipendiums while Smalltalk GSoC as continuation of Smalltalk-wide org won't have a lot of good projects with mentor pool and will also get much less stipendiums. And now question back to you, will you take a responsibility for such outcome? Janko P.S: Legal entity matters nothing, please read FAQ carefully: "What is a mentoring organization? A group running an active free/open source software project, e.g. the Python Software Foundation. The project does not need to be a legally incorporated entity." http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/document/show/gsoc_program/google/gsoc201... Legal entity is needed only for receiving the money and for this any entity can be used. If not others a Software Freedom Conservancy can be asked.
On 08 Feb 2014, at 11:34, Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@eranova.si <mailto:janko.mivsek@eranova.si>> wrote:
.. and of course my answer:
Dear Smalltalkers,
Stef is overreacting as always, going off-topic and don't want to see the real reasons behind this proposal. Which is to make GSoC attractive to all Smalltalkers by removing the last doubt about the any bias towards any Smalltalk or group. That's why I propose to go more independent under new name 'Smalltalk', besides a clearly better visibility of such name of course.
I invite you to follow the debate on GSoC mentor list:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors
All mentors with voting rights on past GSoCs please join back to this mailing list and help with debate:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/join
Best regards Janko
Dne 08. 02. 2014 10:53, piše Pharo4Stef:
Iâm sorry to have to forward you this kind of mail but I do it. I will not send other emails on the topics.
Stef
Dear community
On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> janko is kind of declaring that ESUG was not doing a good job managing GSOC. We feel insulted and we are quite concerned by that fact. Personally if students would not be involved I would vote that ESUG does not have anything to do with GSOC. Because it costs us money, time and stress. Note in addition that we never interferred with the choice or anything.
I will ask the ESUG board to decide because we cannot do the job, spend time, money and be treated like that. Sorry! We are sad but this is like that.
Then we do not like the kind of mails that Janko is sending us about the fact that ESUG is biased towards Pharo. Where are the research teams and teachers? Of course: the mails of janko are just so nice. I let you judge.
It is particularly fun since this year we (the pharo board) decided not to organise a Pharo conference to avoid competing with ESUG.
About motivations for my proposal:
1. 'Smalltalk' is more recognizable name on first spot that 'ESUG' . And this matters when a student looks at around 150 GSoC organizations to choose, which one to check and try. See last year list of orgs <http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org/list/public/google/gsoc2013>.
2. ESUG is currently regarded by many as too biased towards Pharo. Let we avoid starting debating is this is true or not. Making our org more independent will I hope remove any remaining doubt about that.
I feel shocked and insulted but I take it easy, having success make you as easy target for jaleous people. This is strange that some people would prefer to have a non existing/moving open-source smalltalk. May be the losers theory.
I added the answer of marcus below (because marcus usually is much calmer than me) so that Janko succeeded to get marcus reacting like that is a nice proof in itself.
Seriously Smalltalk is in a so good shape in presence of lua, Javascript, ruby and python, clojure that we should fight.
Excellent idea thank for this nice initiative.
Stef
Begin forwarded message:
*From: *Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@gmail.com <mailto:janko.mivsek@gmail.com> <mailto:janko.mivsek@gmail.com>> *Subject: **[gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name* *Date: *8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 *To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> *Reply-To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com>
Dear mentors,
I propose that we run this year GSoC simply under 'Smalltalk' name. Mentoring organization will be us mentors of past and current GSoCs, as the name 'mentoring organization' implies anyway. Such organization therefore doesn't need to be some kind of legal entity.
Because I need to open a new website and we have only one week to deadline, decision needs to be done soon.
Best regards Janko
--- Janko Mivšek Smalltalk GSoC Admin Team
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Smalltalk GSoC mentors" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com> <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Of course you need it: I filled out quite some paperwork for Google. ESUG is an official Google supplier, for that I filled american tax forms and so on.
Without an organisation that will be very difficult. How do yu receive money for the flight if someone goes to the meeting in the fall?
One of the reasons why the Smalltalk GSOC was accepted was I think that it was the same organisation that is already in the books of google.
And I do not see why to change that: ESUG did a good job, we even lost money (that is, we spend more money on additional Summer of Code slots than got in with the money from google). We payed all additional expenses of the people going to the Summit: Google only pays the flight and hotel. Everyhting else not (e.g. going from the airpot to the hotel).
What we need to discuss this year is if additional slots make sense: We had last year the fast that a) it was very expensive for ESUG b) even then, we got complaints that it was unfair that we did not pay the same as google c) that it was very extremely unfair that the student could not put âGoogle Summer of Codeâ on the CV.
The last is the Killer: money from ESUG is just money. GSoC is more. So we ask if it is really worth to spend the money if even the students are not happy about it.
And if your motivation behind is that this way you think it will be easier to enable âQuotasâ for different Smalltalks: I think this is a dumb idea.
Yes, Pharo is very active. So could every other Smalltalk be, too. They just need to do it. If they do not, it is not my duty to limit my activity for âFairnessâ. Limiting the activity level of those who do to be more âin lineâ with what those do who do nothing is just *insane*. Itâs a description of death itself.
Marcus
-- Janko Mivšek Svetovalec za informatiko Eranova d.o.o. Ljubljana, Slovenija www.eranova.si <http://www.eranova.si/> tel: 01 514 22 55 faks: 01 514 22 56 gsm: 031 674 565
-- Janko Mivšek Svetovalec za informatiko Eranova d.o.o. Ljubljana, Slovenija www.eranova.si tel: 01 514 22 55 faks: 01 514 22 56 gsm: 031 674 565
Personally I have to agree with you Stef. As a lawyer myself, keeping things separate is my number one rule when I work with legal cases and it is what I advice most of my clients doings. Remove any room for doubt. Pharo has chosen to follow its own path. It does not even have the goal to be a Smalltalk evnironment and language but rather a Smalltalk inspired one as it is clearly stated on the front page of the website. So if Pharo is to be a separate entity entirely from smalltalk languages doing its own independent thing then it makes very good sense to me to have its own GSOC part. It also a very good idea from a management perspective, legal perspective, financial etc. Keeping things separate will clear up also any confusion what Pharo is and what it stands for. No conspiracy theories and no suspicion. This already has worked very well in favor of Pharo, I don't see any problem with it. I also think because of Pharo popularity it would be more fair to smalltalk implementations. This way there will no feeling that Pharo takes too much of the pie. On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Pharo4Stef <pharo4Stef@free.fr> wrote:
Janko
in fact I'thinking about it may be this is the time to propose a Pharo specific GSOC program. If they are enough people willing to do that we have an association with a real legal status ready for that.
:) thanks for giving us the idea.
Stef
On 08 Feb 2014, at 11:34, Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@eranova.si> wrote:
.. and of course my answer:
Dear Smalltalkers,
Stef is overreacting as always, going off-topic and don't want to see the real reasons behind this proposal. Which is to make GSoC attractive to all Smalltalkers by removing the last doubt about the any bias towards any Smalltalk or group. That's why I propose to go more independent under new name 'Smalltalk', besides a clearly better visibility of such name of course.
I invite you to follow the debate on GSoC mentor list:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors
All mentors with voting rights on past GSoCs please join back to this mailing list and help with debate:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/join
Best regards Janko
Dne 08. 02. 2014 10:53, piše Pharo4Stef:
I'm sorry to have to forward you this kind of mail but I do it. I will not send other emails on the topics.
Stef
Dear community
On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com<smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com>> janko is kind of declaring that ESUG was not doing a good job managing GSOC. We feel insulted and we are quite concerned by that fact. Personally if students would not be involved I would vote that ESUG does not have anything to do with GSOC. Because it costs us money, time and stress. Note in addition that we never interferred with the choice or anything.
I will ask the ESUG board to decide because we cannot do the job, spend time, money and be treated like that. Sorry! We are sad but this is like that.
Then we do not like the kind of mails that Janko is sending us about the fact that ESUG is biased towards Pharo. Where are the research teams and teachers? Of course: the mails of janko are just so nice. I let you judge.
It is particularly fun since this year we (the pharo board) decided not to organise a Pharo conference to avoid competing with ESUG.
About motivations for my proposal:
1. 'Smalltalk' is more recognizable name on first spot that 'ESUG' . And this matters when a student looks at around 150 GSoC organizations to choose, which one to check and try. See last year list of orgs <http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org/list/public/google/gsoc2013>.
2. ESUG is currently regarded by many as too biased towards Pharo. Let we avoid starting debating is this is true or not. Making our org more independent will I hope remove any remaining doubt about that.
I feel shocked and insulted but I take it easy, having success make you as easy target for jaleous people. This is strange that some people would prefer to have a non existing/moving open-source smalltalk. May be the losers theory.
I added the answer of marcus below (because marcus usually is much calmer than me) so that Janko succeeded to get marcus reacting like that is a nice proof in itself.
Seriously Smalltalk is in a so good shape in presence of lua, Javascript, ruby and python, clojure that we should fight.
Excellent idea thank for this nice initiative.
Stef
Begin forwarded message:
*From: *Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@gmail.com <mailto:janko.mivsek@gmail.com <janko.mivsek@gmail.com>>> *Subject: **[gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name* *Date: *8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 *To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com<smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com>
*Reply-To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com<smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com>
Dear mentors,
I propose that we run this year GSoC simply under 'Smalltalk' name. Mentoring organization will be us mentors of past and current GSoCs, as the name 'mentoring organization' implies anyway. Such organization therefore doesn't need to be some kind of legal entity.
Because I need to open a new website and we have only one week to deadline, decision needs to be done soon.
Best regards Janko
--- Janko Mivšek Smalltalk GSoC Admin Team
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Smalltalk GSoC mentors" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com<smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>
. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Of course you need it: I filled out quite some paperwork for Google. ESUG is an official Google supplier, for that I filled american tax forms and so on.
Without an organisation that will be very difficult. How do yu receive money for the flight if someone goes to the meeting in the fall?
One of the reasons why the Smalltalk GSOC was accepted was I think that it was the same organisation that is already in the books of google.
And I do not see why to change that: ESUG did a good job, we even lost money (that is, we spend more money on additional Summer of Code slots than got in with the money from google). We payed all additional expenses of the people going to the Summit: Google only pays the flight and hotel. Everyhting else not (e.g. going from the airpot to the hotel).
What we need to discuss this year is if additional slots make sense: We had last year the fast that a) it was very expensive for ESUG b) even then, we got complaints that it was unfair that we did not pay the same as google c) that it was very extremely unfair that the student could not put "Google Summer of Code" on the CV.
The last is the Killer: money from ESUG is just money. GSoC is more. So we ask if it is really worth to spend the money if even the students are not happy about it.
And if your motivation behind is that this way you think it will be easier to enable "Quotas" for different Smalltalks: I think this is a dumb idea.
Yes, Pharo is very active. So could every other Smalltalk be, too. They just need to do it. If they do not, it is not my duty to limit my activity for "Fairness". Limiting the activity level of those who do to be more "in line" with what those do who do nothing is just *insane*. It's a description of death itself.
Marcus
-- Janko Mivšek Svetovalec za informatiko Eranova d.o.o. Ljubljana, Slovenija www.eranova.si tel: 01 514 22 55 faks: 01 514 22 56 gsm: 031 674 565
1. Creating separate powerful organisation that will move in one direction will give good results in a longer time, but the beginning will be tuff. 2. I wouldnât call it a âPharoâ organisation. e.g. Amber is cool too, no? In fact it should be some group that wantâs to do rings for real and not just state that they are writing a code in Smalltalk. I can contribute to that a bit. Uko On 08 Feb 2014, at 12:52, kilon alios <kilon.alios@gmail.com> wrote:
Personally I have to agree with you Stef.
As a lawyer myself, keeping things separate is my number one rule when I work with legal cases and it is what I advice most of my clients doings. Remove any room for doubt.
Pharo has chosen to follow its own path. It does not even have the goal to be a Smalltalk evnironment and language but rather a Smalltalk inspired one as it is clearly stated on the front page of the website.
So if Pharo is to be a separate entity entirely from smalltalk languages doing its own independent thing then it makes very good sense to me to have its own GSOC part. It also a very good idea from a management perspective, legal perspective, financial etc. Keeping things separate will clear up also any confusion what Pharo is and what it stands for. No conspiracy theories and no suspicion. This already has worked very well in favor of Pharo, I don't see any problem with it.
I also think because of Pharo popularity it would be more fair to smalltalk implementations. This way there will no feeling that Pharo takes too much of the pie.
On Sat, Feb 8, 2014 at 12:40 PM, Pharo4Stef <pharo4Stef@free.fr> wrote: Janko
in fact I'thinking about it may be this is the time to propose a Pharo specific GSOC program. If they are enough people willing to do that we have an association with a real legal status ready for that.
:) thanks for giving us the idea.
Stef
On 08 Feb 2014, at 11:34, Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@eranova.si> wrote:
.. and of course my answer:
Dear Smalltalkers,
Stef is overreacting as always, going off-topic and don't want to see the real reasons behind this proposal. Which is to make GSoC attractive to all Smalltalkers by removing the last doubt about the any bias towards any Smalltalk or group. That's why I propose to go more independent under new name 'Smalltalk', besides a clearly better visibility of such name of course.
I invite you to follow the debate on GSoC mentor list:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors
All mentors with voting rights on past GSoCs please join back to this mailing list and help with debate:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/join
Best regards Janko
Dne 08. 02. 2014 10:53, piše Pharo4Stef:
Iâm sorry to have to forward you this kind of mail but I do it. I will not send other emails on the topics.
Stef
Dear community
On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> janko is kind of declaring that ESUG was not doing a good job managing GSOC. We feel insulted and we are quite concerned by that fact. Personally if students would not be involved I would vote that ESUG does not have anything to do with GSOC. Because it costs us money, time and stress. Note in addition that we never interferred with the choice or anything.
I will ask the ESUG board to decide because we cannot do the job, spend time, money and be treated like that. Sorry! We are sad but this is like that.
Then we do not like the kind of mails that Janko is sending us about the fact that ESUG is biased towards Pharo. Where are the research teams and teachers? Of course: the mails of janko are just so nice. I let you judge.
It is particularly fun since this year we (the pharo board) decided not to organise a Pharo conference to avoid competing with ESUG.
About motivations for my proposal:
1. 'Smalltalk' is more recognizable name on first spot that 'ESUG' . And this matters when a student looks at around 150 GSoC organizations to choose, which one to check and try. See last year list of orgs <http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org/list/public/google/gsoc2013>.
2. ESUG is currently regarded by many as too biased towards Pharo. Let we avoid starting debating is this is true or not. Making our org more independent will I hope remove any remaining doubt about that.
I feel shocked and insulted but I take it easy, having success make you as easy target for jaleous people. This is strange that some people would prefer to have a non existing/moving open-source smalltalk. May be the losers theory.
I added the answer of marcus below (because marcus usually is much calmer than me) so that Janko succeeded to get marcus reacting like that is a nice proof in itself.
Seriously Smalltalk is in a so good shape in presence of lua, Javascript, ruby and python, clojure that we should fight.
Excellent idea thank for this nice initiative.
Stef
Begin forwarded message:
*From: *Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@gmail.com <mailto:janko.mivsek@gmail.com>> *Subject: **[gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name* *Date: *8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 *To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> *Reply-To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com>
Dear mentors,
I propose that we run this year GSoC simply under 'Smalltalk' name. Mentoring organization will be us mentors of past and current GSoCs, as the name 'mentoring organization' implies anyway. Such organization therefore doesn't need to be some kind of legal entity.
Because I need to open a new website and we have only one week to deadline, decision needs to be done soon.
Best regards Janko
--- Janko Mivšek Smalltalk GSoC Admin Team
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Smalltalk GSoC mentors" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com>. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
Of course you need it: I filled out quite some paperwork for Google. ESUG is an official Google supplier, for that I filled american tax forms and so on.
Without an organisation that will be very difficult. How do yu receive money for the flight if someone goes to the meeting in the fall?
One of the reasons why the Smalltalk GSOC was accepted was I think that it was the same organisation that is already in the books of google.
And I do not see why to change that: ESUG did a good job, we even lost money (that is, we spend more money on additional Summer of Code slots than got in with the money from google). We payed all additional expenses of the people going to the Summit: Google only pays the flight and hotel. Everyhting else not (e.g. going from the airpot to the hotel).
What we need to discuss this year is if additional slots make sense: We had last year the fast that a) it was very expensive for ESUG b) even then, we got complaints that it was unfair that we did not pay the same as google c) that it was very extremely unfair that the student could not put âGoogle Summer of Codeâ on the CV.
The last is the Killer: money from ESUG is just money. GSoC is more. So we ask if it is really worth to spend the money if even the students are not happy about it.
And if your motivation behind is that this way you think it will be easier to enable âQuotasâ for different Smalltalks: I think this is a dumb idea.
Yes, Pharo is very active. So could every other Smalltalk be, too. They just need to do it. If they do not, it is not my duty to limit my activity for âFairnessâ. Limiting the activity level of those who do to be more âin lineâ with what those do who do nothing is just *insane*. Itâs a description of death itself.
Marcus
-- Janko Mivšek Svetovalec za informatiko Eranova d.o.o. Ljubljana, Slovenija www.eranova.si tel: 01 514 22 55 faks: 01 514 22 56 gsm: 031 674 565
1. Creating separate powerful organisation that will move in one direction will give good results in a longer time, but the beginning will be tuff.
I do not think that we should do it. We were frustated in the past that we could not participate then we participate and ESUG was nice to handle the billing part. So I would let run it now that marcus and luc spent the time to iron everything. Now it would be good that people stop to piss on us.
2. I wouldnât call it a âPharoâ organisation. e.g. Amber is cool too, no? In fact it should be some group that wantâs to do rings for real and not just state that they are writing a code in Smalltalk.
indeed. I propose that just to see how far Janko was going. I think that it would be a stupid move. This is why we stopped organizing a Pharo specific conference this year. But on the other hand this is too easy to say that ESUG is biaised. And this is not good from an energy stand point. But some people are better at ranting than doing. Stef
HI All, ESUG is not unknown. Community members know exactly what ESUG is. We don't seem to have trouble attracting participants and completing projects using the ESUG name for GSoC. There is so much cool stuff to do and it seems cool people to do the work. ESUG has been doing a terrific job supporting Smalltalk. Success matters. I would vote to not mess with success. The ESUG name should stay. Now if we had even more groups mentoring Smalltalk for GSoC that would be fine with me too. There is no reason to lose any. All the best, Ron Teitelbaum
-----Original Message----- From: Pharo-dev [mailto:pharo-dev-bounces@lists.pharo.org] On Behalf Of Pharo4Stef Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2014 9:54 AM To: Pharo Development List Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] for those not in the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors mailing-list nor in esug
1. Creating separate powerful organisation that will move in one direction will give good results in a longer time, but the beginning will be tuff.
I do not think that we should do it. We were frustated in the past that we could not participate then we participate and ESUG was nice to handle the billing part. So I would let run it now that marcus and luc spent the time to iron everything. Now it would be good that people stop to piss on us.
2. I wouldn't call it a "Pharo" organisation. e.g. Amber is cool too, no? In fact it should be some group that want's to do rings for real and not just state that they are writing a code in Smalltalk.
indeed. I propose that just to see how far Janko was going. I think that it would be a stupid move.
This is why we stopped organizing a Pharo specific conference this year. But on the other hand this is too easy to say that ESUG is biaised. And this is not good from an energy stand point. But some people are better at ranting than doing.
Stef
thanks ron. For us keeping the things simple and working is the best. We just mentioned to janko that using the money that GOSC send 500Euros to pay other Smalltalk projects at the same time than GSOC projects is not automatically efficient. This is not that we want to keep the money for ESUG. Why? - students get the money but not the GSOC fame for their CV - usually it is rare that we got so many good guys. Now if the guys are good I would really do it. but from what I understood some mentors were not happy last year (igor, guillermo and me were not happy with the work done). Of course it can happen but it is difficult to choose so I would prefer that as a community we trust each other (and do not get polluted by this project is in Pharo. Usually I try to attract the best students of the lectures. Alex is doing the same and Noury too. So this year Ronie, Leo, Max, Vincent (if he applies) are all excellent students we saw in action and that ranked 1st or second in their lectures. - finally we should pay attention because there is an overhead (now we fill up all the information required by the google accounting system Now each time ESUG sponsors something we always ask ourselves - impact impact impact - it can be because we keep a smart guy in the communitee and there is a better chance that he will stay having fun with us - it can be topics - it can be lecture creationâ¦. For example for the new lecture in Cameron, we invited Hayatou with my team money. Then he learned Moose then I gave him all my lectures and CD. Then he came as a student volunteer at ESUG. Then ESUG sent him books. When I went to give lectures at Prague, ESUG payed the flight and hotel. Sometimes when my team has some money left we pay to keep money for ESUG. And at Prague, I put them in contact with Gemstone people for a lecture on databases. And I presented Smalltalk success stories: GS, VW and Pharo ones. Recently I gave all my lectures to a guy arriving to Delft and we will help him trying to push a lecture there first using my team money. So we (me and rmod team) pay real attention to pay ESUG attendance and paying trips when we can. Stef
HI All,
ESUG is not unknown. Community members know exactly what ESUG is. We don't seem to have trouble attracting participants and completing projects using the ESUG name for GSoC. There is so much cool stuff to do and it seems cool people to do the work. ESUG has been doing a terrific job supporting Smalltalk. Success matters.
I would vote to not mess with success. The ESUG name should stay. Now if we had even more groups mentoring Smalltalk for GSoC that would be fine with me too. There is no reason to lose any.
All the best,
Ron Teitelbaum
-----Original Message----- From: Pharo-dev [mailto:pharo-dev-bounces@lists.pharo.org] On Behalf Of Pharo4Stef Sent: Saturday, February 08, 2014 9:54 AM To: Pharo Development List Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] for those not in the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors mailing-list nor in esug
1. Creating separate powerful organisation that will move in one direction will give good results in a longer time, but the beginning will be tuff.
I do not think that we should do it. We were frustated in the past that we could not participate then we participate and ESUG was nice to handle the billing part. So I would let run it now that marcus and luc spent the time to iron everything. Now it would be good that people stop to piss on us.
2. I wouldn't call it a "Pharo" organisation. e.g. Amber is cool too, no? In fact it should be some group that want's to do rings for real and not just state that they are writing a code in Smalltalk.
indeed. I propose that just to see how far Janko was going. I think that it would be a stupid move.
This is why we stopped organizing a Pharo specific conference this year. But on the other hand this is too easy to say that ESUG is biaised. And this is not good from an energy stand point. But some people are better at ranting than doing.
Stef
participants (5)
-
Janko Mivšek -
kilon alios -
Pharo4Stef -
Ron Teitelbaum -
Yuriy Tymchuk