3.9 feature voting round

On 23.01.2006 11:55, stéphane ducasse wrote:
> Hi
>
> I think that what is also important to consider is that we do not own  
> the people time.

> And even if you vote because you want something to be done, it may  
> happen that nothing happen at the end.

Nevertheless it may be interesting for people to know what others want,
if they have more than one idea; a good example is
  http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/940
.
OK, a little bit outdated, but a nice try.


Regards,
Stephan

>
> Stef
>...

--
Stephan Rudlof ([hidden email])
   "Genius doesn't work on an assembly line basis.
    You can't simply say, 'Today I will be brilliant.'"
    -- Kirk, "The Ultimate Computer", stardate 4731.3

On 24.01.2006 01:07, I wrote:
> OK, a little bit outdated, but a nice try.
No, it has been far more than a try: he has really finished one of these
projects!

--sr

>...
--
Stephan Rudlof ([hidden email])
   "Genius doesn't work on an assembly line basis.
    You can't simply say, 'Today I will be brilliant.'"
    -- Kirk, "The Ultimate Computer", stardate 4731.3

Strange. I'll look later today whether there's a walkback on the
server or something.

In any case, Adrian's call seems to have helped, there's now a whole
list of stuff. Apparently the software still has quirks, judging by
the empty items, I'll clean it up when I have some time, maybe later
today.

Regards,

Cees

On 1/23/06, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote:

Il giorno dom, 22/01/2006 alle 18.11 +0100, Cees De Groot ha scritto:
> On 1/22/06, tim Rowledge <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > For a very long time we've been talking (waffling?) about making a
> > break and adopting a new compiled method format, cutting out a lot of
> > ancient backwards compatible dross, ... oh, lots. 4.0 really ought to
> > be that.
> >
> Yup. And if I recall correctly, the last time we discussed this the
> idea was to make 3.9 the latest of the 3 series, and start working on
> a 'burn the diskpacks' 4.0 after that.

Are we sure that the current process can handle a 4.0 release in a
smooth way? Wouldn't it be better if we had another 3.x release, in
order to fine tune the process?

        Giovanni

On 25-Jan-06, at 12:15 PM, Giovanni Corriga wrote:
>
> [snip]
> Are we sure that the current process can handle a 4.0 release in a
> smooth way? Wouldn't it be better if we had another 3.x release, in
> order to fine tune the process?
I think we should anticipate at least another 3.x release before any  
4.0. A bunch of work to do.


tim
--
tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
No program done by an undergrad will work after she graduates.

On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 20:26:26 +0100, Martin Wirblat <[hidden email]> writes:

Why don't you work on documenting, implementing, and debugging? Those
who do the work get a *lot* more say in what work does or doesn't get
done.

Those who do the work deserve to lead. They don't deserve your
complaints.

Scott

Scott A Crosby <[hidden email]> writes:

I don't understand why we don't want listen someone who feel that
there is a sad state and a problem into the squeak community ? Why
such attacks ? Do we want that he feels guilty ? Because he's not
documenting, implementing or debugging ? Why not to welcome him and
understand his feelings - deeply ? Do we say that he's wrong ? Why
don't listen to him ? This is true that there is leaders in this
community. Do we really need leaders ? And please, don't kill this
question, it's so easy to say : "obviously we need them !". Putting it
into question is something really important, because humans used to
have chiefs, leaders, presidents : it seems something widely
accepted... And why leader want to lead ?  And what about voting ?
Isn't voting the authority of the majority on the minority ?  And what
if the minority is right ? Has rightness something to do with both
leading or voting ? It seems that we draw a relation between both
things, but is it right ?

Cheers,
Samir