3.9 feature voting round

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
47 messages Options
123
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Decision processes and an RFC

Stephan Rudlof
On 23.01.2006 11:55, st├ęphane 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OK, a little bit outdated, but a nice try.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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

PS: Re: Decision processes and an RFC

Stephan Rudlof
On 24.01.2006 01:07, I wrote:

> On 23.01.2006 11:55, st├ęphane 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 OK, a little bit outdated, but a nice try.
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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 3.9 feature voting round

Cees De Groot
In reply to this post by timrowledge
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:

>
> On 23-Jan-06, at 2:26 PM, Adrian Lienhard wrote:
>
> > So far there are only four items in this list of wish items at
> > http://de-1.tric.nl/seaside/sqp/list (not counting Lukas' joker).
> > Is everybody so pleased or desperate or just not interested enough?
> > Hey, it's not about signing up to do the work in this case...
> well I can't login to vote. SqP seems to work ok so no idea what went
> wrong.
>
>
> tim
> --
> tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
> <-------- The information went data way -------->
>
>
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Decision processes (was: Re: The state of the Squeak community)

Giovanni Corriga
In reply to this post by Cees De Groot
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


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Decision processes (was: Re: The state of the Squeak community)

timrowledge

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.



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The state of the Squeak community

Scott A Crosby
In reply to this post by Martin Wirblat
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 20:26:26 +0100, Martin Wirblat <[hidden email]> writes:

> Cees De Groot wrote:
> ....
>
>> - Advise, I repeat: advise, the 3.9a team. They're entirely free to
>> completely ignore the outcome of this stuff, although if many many
>> many people vote for something and they don't do it, it'd be nice if
>> they'd give a reason;
>
> A few people play leaders and they feel free to completely ignore the
> complete community. You described exactly the sad state of Squeak
> today.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: The state of the Squeak community

Samir Saidani
Scott A Crosby <[hidden email]> writes:

> On Wed, 18 Jan 2006 20:26:26 +0100, Martin Wirblat <[hidden email]> writes:
>
>> Cees De Groot wrote:
>> ....
>>
>>> - Advise, I repeat: advise, the 3.9a team. They're entirely free to
>>> completely ignore the outcome of this stuff, although if many many
>>> many people vote for something and they don't do it, it'd be nice if
>>> they'd give a reason;
>>
>> A few people play leaders and they feel free to completely ignore the
>> complete community. You described exactly the sad state of Squeak
>> today.
>
> 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

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


123