ESUG considers sponsoring the Pharo Consortium

The ESUG board currently considers sponsoring the Pharo Consortium
(see http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/pharo-project/2012-June/066881.html).
We believe that Pharo is important for the Smalltalk ecosystem.

Note that ESUG is promoting Smalltalk in general and this action is in
the same vein as previous actions such as sponsoring local Smalltalk
groups (FAST, Catalan, Russian, …), Smalltalk dialects
(SqueakFoundation, etoy), development projects (Mars, DBXTalk, DrGeo
II, SqueakVirtual Machine cleaning), and books (Seaside and GNU book).

Before deciding, the board would like to gather feedback from the
community. We want to be clear that there is a strict distinction
between ESUG and Pharo (both consortium and association) even if some
people are involved in both.

What do you think?

--
Damien Cassou
http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st

"Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them
popular by not having them." James Iry

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

Damien,

On 4 July 2012 17:01, Damien Cassou <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Before deciding, the board would like to gather feedback from the
> community. We want to be clear that there is a strict distinction
> between ESUG and Pharo (both consortium and association) even if some
> people are involved in both.

how many people on the ESUG board can be considered representatives of
communities of Smalltalk dialects other than Pharo?

(I've been merely lurking on most mailing lists for quite a while now,
I haven't been following developments or discussions, I don't know any
more about people's Smalltalk-wise affiliations.)

Regards,

Michael

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

Hi Michael!

Good to see you back!

> how many people on the ESUG board can be considered representatives of
> communities of Smalltalk dialects other than Pharo?

In an ideal World, this would be indeed important.
However the amount of people willing to actively participate in the ESUG board is really small.
And being a small community should not prevent us from moving ahead.

Cheers,
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel  http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.




_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

-------- Original-Nachricht --------
Datum: Wed, 4 Jul 2012 17:33:12 +0200
Von: Alexandre Bergel <[hidden email]>
An: Michael Haupt <[hidden email]>
CC: ESUG Mailing list <[hidden email]>
Betreff: Re: [Esug-list] ESUG considers sponsoring the Pharo Consortium

Hi Michael!

Good to see you back!

> how many people on the ESUG board can be considered representatives of
> communities of Smalltalk dialects other than Pharo?

In an ideal World, this would be indeed important.
However the amount of people willing to actively participate in the ESUG board is really small.

Really? I don't recall anyone ever asking. In fact, the whole election process of the ESUG board is a complete mystery to me personally. Googling "ESUG board election" nets me a message from 2002(!) about an upcoming election, that's it. Compare this say, with googling "Squeak board election" and you will find election results each year, plus each candidates announcement, discussions, vote counts etc. A bit more transparency would certainly help here...

Regarding the original question, I think such a membership is unfair to the other open source communities. Sponsoring of specific projects with the goal of fostering the overall Smalltalk community is one thing, paying a perpetual "Pharo tax" quite another. I do not see a compelling reason why Pharo should be supported in such a way by ESUG and not GST, Squeak, Cuis, or any other open source Smalltalk implementation. The money could certainly be used by the other projects for activities like going to and presenting at the ESUG conferences which is often not done for lack of funding. If ESUG wants to sponsor open source Smalltalk dialects by handing out money directly, it should do so fairly and transparently and not favor a single fork of a single dialect.

Cheers,
  - Andreas

And being a small community should not prevent us from moving ahead.

Cheers,
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.




_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

I left Squeak because I was "pissed away".

I have no problem to leave ESUG, too.

herewith I unsubscribe from the ESUG list.

        Have Fun

                Marcus


On Jul 4, 2012, at 6:13 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:

--
Marcus Denker -- http://marcusdenker.de


_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

On 2012-Jul-4, at 12:13 , Andreas Raab wrote:

> If ESUG wants to sponsor open source Smalltalk dialects by handing out money directly, it should do so fairly and transparently and not favor a single fork of a single dialect.

+1

../Dave

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

Ho ho this is not the proper place to discuss this. The ESUG board selection has always been done quite openly, but on the yearly conference, there is not even ground for any suspition, please. Andreas could you please discuss this with the board first before venting this on the open mailing list?

Op 4 jul. 2012 om 18:14 heeft Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> het volgende geschreven:

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

Hi,

On 4 July 2012 18:36, Rob Vens <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Ho ho this is not the proper place to discuss this. The ESUG board selection has always been done quite openly, but on the yearly conference, there is not even ground for any suspition, please.

that is completely correct: the boards are elected by acclamation
(usually) when the community is gathered at the conference. IMHO this
is as transparent as it gets. Nothing to complain there. Well, yes,
the procedure *could* be mentioned on the web page, but the process is
OK.

Best,

Michael

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

[ this is my personal opinion. I may be wrong, but I do not think so ]

> I do not see a compelling reason why Pharo should be supported in such a way by ESUG and not GST, Squeak, Cuis, or any other open source Smalltalk implementation.

There is no reason. Pharo will get a sponsor because people behind Pharo asked for it, in the same way that people behind GST asked.

> The money could certainly be used by the other projects for activities like going to and presenting at the ESUG conferences which is often not done for lack of funding. If ESUG wants to sponsor open source Smalltalk dialects by handing out money directly, it should do so fairly and transparently and not favor a single fork of a single dialect.

I am pretty sure that if the Squeak community, or any other community set up a nice and reasonable proposal, the esug board will consider it.
This discussion reminds me a large project that got founded recently in Chile. Everybody said they are interested in participating (and receiving money), but only a very few actually made up a clear, concise and promising proposal. Not that they were not included in the discussion and the regular meetings. The persons who did not receive the money "were too busy to write the proposal". Well... at the end they complained saying that it is not fair.

Cheers,
Alexandre

--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel  http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.




_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

Alex,

let me clarify my point in response to yours.

You say that project X applied for sponsoring, and the board considers
this now. That is completely OK.

It just so happens that it might well be that (worst case) 100 % of
the ESUG board members are also project X community members (some of
them even in positions that could fairly be called leadership
positions). In that case, the decision of the board would - whatever
the outcome - be biased due to a conflict of interest, and a decision
in favour of project X would have a strong smell of nepotism.

Hence my original question. Which still has not been answered. Before
I can give an answer to Damien's (the ESUG board's) question, I need
to know that to come to a conclusion.

Your initial response to my question does not count as an answer: I
did not want to engage in any philosophical discussions about ideal
worlds, I did not want to start any flame wars or make ESUG board
members leave this list. Not. My. Plan. Preferably, I'd like to know
which communities are actually represented by the body that leads /
governs / whatevers this community-spanning organisation.

Best,

Michael

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

Thanks for asking us. Personally I think it would be better for ESUG not to contribute financially to Pharo. In general, user groups don't contribute financially to the organizations which make the products in question - indeed, often it works the other way around, with the product organizations sponsoring user groups or their activities.

I'm sure everyone would agree that any board members with a clear connection to Pharo should declare a conflict of interest on this issue, and refrain from discussion or voting. That's standard practice, and for good reason. Even when a board is completely open, honest, and declares even potentially perceived conflicts of interest, those outside the board will always be outsiders, and liable to feel not everything is being revealed - that's just human nature.

It's great that the board is asking for our opinions, and I'm sure they'll make the best decision for ESUG. And whatever happens, I'm sure Pharo and other Smalltalks know ESUG is very much on their side.

All the best,
Steve
PS useful advice on conflicts of interest for non-profits:
http://www.boardsource.org/Knowledge.asp?ID=3.389
--
Steven Kelly, CTO, MetaCase

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

Thanks, Steve, I couldn't make my point clearer than you did.

It's great ESUG is there, and it's great that Pharo is pushing on
Smalltalk the way and at the pace it does. It's good that both ESUG and
Pharo are here and we all benefit a lot from both of them, as we do from
other Smalltalk vendors' work and open source projects.

I am not aware of the detailed financial situation of ESUG, but I would
prefer to see things like multi-platform Smalltalk projects being
supported/sponsored by ESUG. The multi-platform nature should be a high
priority. Not all Smalltalkers can freely choose what dialect they use,
and one of the goals of ESUG is (or should be) to help get all
Smalltalkers in closer touch and make the Smalltalk worl a better place
for all of us.

So, if there is some yearly program in which the community can choose a
project or platform to be supported financially, why not also support
the Pharo Consortium? But also help Amber, GST, Seaside or whatever
project in anotrher year.

I am glad people are volunteering for the ESUG board, and I am grateful
for the organizers of the ESUG conference and all the other good stuff
ESUG is doing. I am also happy about the drive behind Pharo. But these
are two pairs of shoes.

Joachim


Am 04.07.12 22:25, schrieb Steven Kelly: --
--

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Objektfabrik Joachim Tuchel          mailto:[hidden email]

Fliederweg 1                         http://www.objektfabrik.de
D-71640 Ludwigsburg     http://joachimtuchel.wordpress.com
Telefon: +49 7141 56 10 86 0         Fax: +49 7141 56 10 86 1





_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

Hi ESUG members,

On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 5:15 PM, Michael Haupt <[hidden email]> wrote:
> how many people on the ESUG board can be considered representatives of
> communities of Smalltalk dialects other than Pharo?

here are the members of the ESUG's board:

President: Stéphane Ducasse
Treasurer: Luc Fabresse
Damien Cassou
Jordi Delgado
Marcus Denker
Alain Plantec
Serge Stinckwich

The rest of this email is my personal opinion and does not necessarily
reflect the one of the board.

Even though I'm unsure about your definition of "representatives of
communities", I don't see myself as being one, whatever the community
you pick. When I decided I wanted to join the board this was not to
represent Smalltalk or Squeak, this was because I loved both and
wanted to spend some time helping. I got elected by participants of
the conference during the last talk, three years ago. I believe this
is the same for most other members, i.e., we don't represent a
particular Smalltalk, we just want to help and do some work for
everyone. Now, if a representative of a community wants to work with
us, we would love to receive his application.

For 3 years now that I'm in this board, we received *a lot of*
requests for sponsoring (being projects, participation to the
conferences, books, articles, ...). If we didn't accept all requests,
I think we are very very close. Most of the times, requests arrive in
already a good shape, we see a great potential for the community or a
real need, and we accept them. Sometimes, we ask people to work some
more on the proposal and most of the time we will eventually accept
them as well. I invite any interested Smalltalker out there to send
founding proposals, we are always happy to help when we can.

Now, let's face it: 2 of the most active participants of the ESUG
board (Marcus and Stéphane) are leaders on the Pharo project. But we,
as a community, must not forget that both where among the most active
participants of Squeak before (I'm talking about code, organization,
presentations, books, ...). These two are very active for the
Smalltalk community and have been for quite some time now. If they
decide to quit the ESUG board (and we already talked about that among
members of the board), who will step up and do their job? I think each
of them spends roughly 1h per day (probably more than that) on ESUG
tasks: preparing the conference, taking care of legal issues,
administrating the web servers, taking care of requests for
sponsoring... Not so funny jobs. They both prefer coding, believe me.
I don't see anyone else in the current board who could do their job
and we didn't receive any application to join the board for at least 3
years.

Finally, the board decided to raise this issue with you today for 1
reason: we are aware of the conflict of interest! We want your opinion
about founding a particular dialect that shares some active
participants with the board itself. But while giving your opinion
please remember one thing: ESUG did help other communities in the past
and we will continue to do it.

My even more personal opinion: would it be fair not to help Pharo
create a consortium simply because some members are so prolific that
they can be very useful for two organizations at the same time? I
don't believe so and I vote for becoming a member of the Pharo
consortium just as much as I would vote for becoming a member of any
other Smalltalk consortium/association/organization/group/whatever.

Best regards,

--
Damien Cassou
http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st

"Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them
popular by not having them." James Iry

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

Damien,

thanks - well noted. Let me reinforce that I do not question the
intentions of anybody in particular. The personal overlaps between the
two entities involved might be considered problematic, and I want to
make up my mind.

On 4 July 2012 23:32, Damien Cassou <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Even though I'm unsure about your definition of "representatives of
> communities", I don't see myself as being one, whatever the community
> you pick.

Say, if someone predominantly uses one particular flavour in their
daily Smalltalking life, they'd be part of that flavour's community;
and being on the board, representing it.

> Now, if a representative of a community wants to work with
> us, we would love to receive his application.

In contrast to my earlier e-mail on process transparency, I have
noticed that while the election itself is transparent, the path to
being eligible in the first place is not. Is there actually such a
thing as a call for applications when board members' terms end? Is
there a nomination phase? A Q&A period to help people make up their
minds?

In short, how does this work?

> Now, let's face it: 2 of the most active participants of the ESUG
> board (Marcus and Stéphane) are leaders on the Pharo project. But we,
> as a community, must not forget that both where among the most active
> participants of Squeak before (I'm talking about code, organization,
> presentations, books, ...). These two are very active for the
> Smalltalk community and have been for quite some time now. If they
> decide to quit the ESUG board (and we already talked about that among
> members of the board), who will step up and do their job?

Good question; see above.

> My even more personal opinion: would it be fair not to help Pharo
> create a consortium simply because some members are so prolific that
> they can be very useful for two organizations at the same time? I
> don't believe so and I vote for becoming a member of the Pharo
> consortium just as much as I would vote for becoming a member of any
> other Smalltalk consortium/association/organization/group/whatever.

What amount is being considered? What percentage of the ESUG budget is that?

Regards,

Michael

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

Hi, 
 the smalltalk community is very small, so there is always going to be a kind of "conflict of interest". ESUG has sponsored many projects in different flavors of smalltalk  and for sure, in many of them, there was one or more members of the ESUG board and other boards or groups or companies and nobody cared...
 I don't think that this idea has a "hidden agenda", I mean, the money it is not going to go to any ESUG board member's pocket but to somebody that will help to have a better smalltalk.
 Also, for me the election process of the ESUG board was always clear, open and I could saw it with my own eyes, so I have no doubts there either.
ESUG has helped a lot of people and organizations related with smalltalk, it would be a pitty not to do it with pharo.
I see this action as a positive one, so I think it is a good idea.
In any case, companies that give money to esug that could see this as a "threat" should be the one to complain but I have not seen any doing it so far.
The Smalltalk comminiy is small (ironically), let's help each other! Let's be positive!
 
Hernan
Ps: thank you for being open and ask something you are not obligated to,  that shows transparency, and please do not confuse clear proceses with lack of transparency, when you DO there is always somerhing you are going to DO wrong, but at least you did!


On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 5:25 PM, Steven Kelly <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Thanks for asking us. Personally I think it would be better for ESUG not to contribute financially to Pharo. In general, user groups don't contribute financially to the organizations which make the products in question - indeed, often it works the other way around, with the product organizations sponsoring user groups or their activities.
>
> I'm sure everyone would agree that any board members with a clear connection to Pharo should declare a conflict of interest on this issue, and refrain from discussion or voting. That's standard practice, and for good reason. Even when a board is completely open, honest, and declares even potentially perceived conflicts of interest, those outside the board will always be outsiders, and liable to feel not everything is being revealed - that's just human nature.
>
> It's great that the board is asking for our opinions, and I'm sure they'll make the best decision for ESUG. And whatever happens, I'm sure Pharo and other Smalltalks know ESUG is very much on their side.
>
> All the best,
> Steve
> PS useful advice on conflicts of interest for non-profits:
> http://www.boardsource.org/Knowledge.asp?ID=3.389
> --
> Steven Kelly, CTO, MetaCase
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]
> > [hidden email]] On Behalf Of Damien Cassou
> > Sent: 4. heinäkuuta 2012 18:02
> > To: ESUG Mailing list
> > Subject: [Esug-list] ESUG considers sponsoring the Pharo Consortium
> >
> > The ESUG board currently considers sponsoring the Pharo Consortium
> > (see http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/pipermail/pharo-project/2012-
> > June/066881.html).
> > We believe that Pharo is important for the Smalltalk ecosystem.
> >
> > Note that ESUG is promoting Smalltalk in general and this action is in
> > the same vein as previous actions such as sponsoring local Smalltalk
> > groups (FAST, Catalan, Russian, ...), Smalltalk dialects
> > (SqueakFoundation, etoy), development projects (Mars, DBXTalk, DrGeo
> > II, SqueakVirtual Machine cleaning), and books (Seaside and GNU book).
> >
> > Before deciding, the board would like to gather feedback from the
> > community. We want to be clear that there is a strict distinction
> > between ESUG and Pharo (both consortium and association) even if some
> > people are involved in both.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > --
> > Damien Cassou
> > http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st
> >
> > "Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them
> > popular by not having them." James Iry
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Esug-list mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
>
> _______________________________________________
> Esug-list mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org



--
Hernán Wilkinson
Agile Software Development, Teaching & Coaching
Phone: +54 - 011 - 4311 - 8404
Mobile: +54 - 911 - 4470 - 7207
email: [hidden email]
site: http://www.10Pines.com
Address: Paraguay 523, Floor 7 N, Buenos Aires, Argentina


--


_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

Being accused of conflicting interest is not very nice to hear, so please those of you concerned stay above that and with us.
I never used Pharo, But If the ESUG board decided to sponsor it, than I just respect their choice.

@+Maarten



_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

Well written and argumented Steven !

Marten

Am 04.07.2012 22:25, schrieb Steven Kelly:
> Thanks for asking us. Personally I think it would be better for ESUG not to contribute financially to Pharo...

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

With this post I would like to give a +1000 for ESUG to sponsor the Pharo Consortium and this is my reasoning:

The past clearly shows us that ESUG does not favour one Smalltalk implementation over another, having helped projects across multiple flavours.  It is also clear that anyone is welcome - and invited - to submit proposals to ESUG and they are always (from my understanding) reviewed fairly.

My most important reasoning however is that it supports ESUG's main purpose in "promoting Smalltalk".  Any boost in innovation, visibility of "anything" Smalltalk will end up being beneficial for the entire Smalltalk community.

I have heard someone use the "a rising tide lifts all boats" idiom in this context, so if ESUG sponsoring the Pharo Consortium may result in rising the Smalltalk tide lifting all Smalltalk boats, I would say "go for it"!  I reckon who on the ESUG board is and how they were/are elected has nothing to do with.  In the same breath it would be nice to see commercial companies like Cincom, Gemstone, Instantiations support the Pharo Consortium for exactly the same reason.

Disclaimer: ESUG also sponsors The World of Smalltalk (an initiative I started) by funding the world.st domain name, which again is intended to be a portal for anything Smalltalk.

Il 04/07/2012 23:32, Damien Cassou ha scritto:
> My even more personal opinion: would it be fair not to help Pharo
> create a consortium simply because some members are so prolific that
> they can be very useful for two organizations at the same time?

No, but it is still a conflict of interest.  I would expect that
Stephane and Marcus do not vote on the issue, and possibly that they do
not participate in board discussions on the matter.

In general I would say that money should flow the other way round
(Pharo->ESUG).  However, as long as the above basic principle is held, I
have no objection to sponsoring the consortium.

Paolo

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

Thanks maarteen

Reading this thread after all we did for Smalltalk is quite taught. The wolfs are back apparently. Sad period.
I think the esug board will have to really decide if ESUG is worth after all. Now may be ESUG popularity is a problem for
certain people or this is the pharo popularity.
May be this is good to not give a chance to a promising open source project (especially when we see that such question never
arose when it was about other Smalltalks). Life is so funny sometimes.

Stef


On Jul 5, 2012, at 6:36 AM, Maarten Mostert wrote:


_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org