[Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!
Locked
1234
1234
Re: [Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!
 
|
El sáb, 06-03-2010 a las 07:41 +0100, Michael Haupt escribió:
> Miguel, > > Am 05.03.2010 um 23:12 schrieb Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez <[hidden email] > m>: > > I just answered this thread because someone said that Etoys > > will never be included in Pharo, > > I never said that. Just re-read. > umm, but you said: "Would the Pharo community like to include Etoys? I doubt it, so the Pharo community will have little incentive to drive interoperability in this particular regard." and I answered that if etoys was a real package in less that a day it would have a ConfigurationOfXXX and be as loadable in Pharo as in Squeak, so that Pharo users that care can use it, and Pharo users that don't care don't have it imposed by the base image. Pharo users don't have nothing in particular against etoys, just we don't want it in the base image, but as a loadable package. > > > Best, > > Michael -- Miguel Cobá http://miguel.leugim.com.mx |
Re: [Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!
|
|
Hi Miguel,
Am 06.03.2010 um 20:10 schrieb Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez <[hidden email] m>: >>> I just answered this thread because someone said that Etoys >>> will never be included in Pharo, >> >> I never said that. Just re-read. > > umm, but you said: > > "Would the Pharo community like to include Etoys? I doubt > it, so the Pharo community will have little incentive to drive > interoperability in this particular regard." exactly. Not quite the same, right? > Pharo users don't have nothing in particular against etoys, just we > don't want it in the base image, but as a loadable package. See above in this thread re various preconfigured images. Best, Michael |
Re: [Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!
|
|
In reply to this post by Randal L. Schwartz
El vie, 05-03-2010 a las 15:45 -0800, Randal L. Schwartz escribió:
> >>>>> "Miguel" == Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez <[hidden email]> writes: > > Miguel> Then Squeak refuses to remove Etoys from base image, even is in process > Miguel> the update and resync of Etoys with upstream squeakland code. > > I do believe the intent is to make etoys unloadable. If you've heard > otherwise, can you poin at it, so that I can be up to date? Yes, it is unloadable since a month ago like someone else said, but that doesn't make Squeak a vehicle for deploying commercial apps? Again, as in another thread I said, the fact you can disassemble the image doesn't mean that you want to disassemble it for deployment. The modularity is one thing. The easy to deploy web/desktop images is also important. You can give a full installed desktop linux server with gui and pidgin and firefox and thunderbird and everything. That doesn't mean that I would accept it for deploying my email server using it. I prefer to start from a minimal linux install and add it only the email server. Not search everything that I don't need and delete it manually. That is why I refer like not commercial-friendly. There is not roadmap that you can rely in order to base your app for a couple of years if you don't know what direction Squeak will be going with the new board. You don't have a defined board blessed support for oldstable images. What will happen to current deployed 3.10 applications when 4.1 is out? and when 4.2 is out? As you surely know, that is a very important thing for selling a solution using Squeak. And the one-man minimal images can't be relied on, (not because of the people behind that efforts they are brilliant, but because the truck factor is crucial here) a community effort is needed for the minimal images to be successful. You don't have well defined deployment setups (the ones that Torsten have made for one-click install are very good, as are the ones that you can find in the lists archives, but no one place where you can go and review all your options for deployment and not just for using a Squeak image) Check: http://rubyonrails.org/deploy is a link in the home page of rails. for squeak you must search the lists. You don't have recipes for deploying Morphic apps, without all the things you don't need to give your customers like squeakmap, universes, monticello, etc. Again, we return to use the unload scripts and hope that you get a working image. Finally I apologize for stating that Squeak don't care for uses other than educational ones, but *my opinion* is that don't ease the use for commercial uses either. > > Miguel> If the board refuses to remove etoys that is for me that they have a > Miguel> preference for the educational use of squeak than the commercial use of > Miguel> squeak. > > As a member of the board, I can tell you this is *not* an intent. > -- Miguel Cobá http://miguel.leugim.com.mx |
Re: [Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!
|
|
Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez skrev 2010-03-06 20:58:
> El vie, 05-03-2010 a las 15:45 -0800, Randal L. Schwartz escribió: > >>>>>>> "Miguel" == Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez<[hidden email]> writes: >>>>>>> >> Miguel> Then Squeak refuses to remove Etoys from base image, even is in process >> Miguel> the update and resync of Etoys with upstream squeakland code. >> >> I do believe the intent is to make etoys unloadable. If you've heard >> otherwise, can you poin at it, so that I can be up to date? >> > Yes, it is unloadable since a month ago like someone else said, but that > doesn't make Squeak a vehicle for deploying commercial apps? Again, as > in another thread I said, the fact you can disassemble the image doesn't > mean that you want to disassemble it for deployment. > > The modularity is one thing. > The easy to deploy web/desktop images is also important. > You can give a full installed desktop linux server with gui and pidgin > and firefox and thunderbird and everything. That doesn't mean that I > would accept it for deploying my email server using it. I prefer to > start from a minimal linux install and add it only the email server. Not > search everything that I don't need and delete it manually. > > That is why I refer like not commercial-friendly. There is not roadmap > that you can rely in order to base your app for a couple of years if you > don't know what direction Squeak will be going with the new board. > > You don't have a defined board blessed support for oldstable images. > What will happen to current deployed 3.10 applications when 4.1 is out? > and when 4.2 is out? As you surely know, that is a very important thing > for selling a solution using Squeak. And the one-man minimal images > can't be relied on, (not because of the people behind that efforts they > are brilliant, but because the truck factor is crucial here) a community > effort is needed for the minimal images to be successful. > > You don't have well defined deployment setups (the ones that Torsten > have made for one-click install are very good, as are the ones that you > can find in the lists archives, but no one place where you can go and > review all your options for deployment and not just for using a Squeak > image) Check: http://rubyonrails.org/deploy is a link in the home page > of rails. for squeak you must search the lists. > > You don't have recipes for deploying Morphic apps, without all the > things you don't need to give your customers like squeakmap, universes, > monticello, etc. Again, we return to use the unload scripts and hope > that you get a working image. > > Finally I apologize for stating that Squeak don't care for uses other > than educational ones, but *my opinion* is that don't ease the use for > commercial uses either. > > > > > >> Miguel> If the board refuses to remove etoys that is for me that they have a >> Miguel> preference for the educational use of squeak than the commercial use of >> Miguel> squeak. >> >> As a member of the board, I can tell you this is *not* an intent. >> >> > Karl |
Re: [Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!
|
|
In reply to this post by Miguel Cobá
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 01:10:11PM -0600, Miguel Enrique Cob? Martinez wrote:
> if etoys was a real package in less that a day it > would have a ConfigurationOfXXX and be as loadable in Pharo as in > Squeak, so that Pharo users that care can use it, and Pharo users that > don't care don't have it imposed by the base image. Wow. is Pharo already that far along in modularity? Cool! As a board candidate I'd like to bring that functionality to Squeak. I will do what I can to make our two biggest desktop applications (Etoys and Croquet/Cobalt) be loadable atop squeak. I'm already in the middle of porting Cobalt back to squeak. Maybe Pharo too once it works. -- Matthew Fulmer (a.k.a. Tapple) |
Re: [Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!
|
|
In reply to this post by Karl Ramberg
El sáb, 06-03-2010 a las 21:47 +0100, Karl Ramberg escribió:
> Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez skrev 2010-03-06 20:58: > Troll > > Karl Woa, and I am a troll because I listed the things I think that are missing in Squeak in order to be easier to use it for commercial thing? Amazed! Well... no, forget it. Once again to all, sorry for disturbing your playfield. I promise myself not to ask nothing else here. Good look Squeak and people. Best regards, -- Miguel Cobá http://miguel.leugim.com.mx |
Re: [Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!
|
|
2010/3/6 Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez <[hidden email]>:
> El sáb, 06-03-2010 a las 21:47 +0100, Karl Ramberg escribió: >> Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez skrev 2010-03-06 20:58: > >> Troll >> >> Karl > > Woa, and I am a troll because I listed the things I think that are > missing in Squeak in order to be easier to use it for commercial thing? > > Amazed! Well... no, forget it. Once again to all, sorry for disturbing > your playfield. I promise myself not to ask nothing else here. > > Good look Squeak and people. > > Best regards, > > -- > Miguel Cobá > http://miguel.leugim.com.mx > Hi Miguel, you know, complaining is not the best way to reach your goals. By positive proposals and/or contributions you could gain audience. You don't have to agree every decision, as we don't have to approve all of your proposals, but if you take a negative and a bit aggressive attitude, it's the surest way to not be listened at all. Cheers Nicolas |
Re: [Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!
|
|
In reply to this post by Miguel Cobá
Miguel, here's the thing. You're words are just plain wrong man and
touching some nerves in the process. You keep saying that with Squeak you start with a kitchen-sink and delete what you don't want. Wrong. Ok, yes, it's still true today, but of course Squeak is just not "done" yet. The unloadability is just the beginning of the path that can and will lead to a "Core" Squeak image, where you start with "nothing" and then add the packages you want. Patience, we're getting there, ok? True, right now a Squeak image may be a few extra meg than a Pharo core image, but we are talking about a little-bit of memory and disk not cpu-cycles by any meaningful stretch. So I think you make a pretty strong complaint when, in a production system, it really just boils down to a few meg of memory and, perhaps, the psychological benefit of feeling "clean" (although sometimes missing modules are a problem in production systems!). My sense is that Squeak cares about it's legacy software, wants to go smaller in a way that keeps most of those "paleolithic" things loadable. The easiest way to do that, we feel, is to massage it while it's still in the image, make it unloadable, reloadable, THEN unload it, save the smaller image and deploy that as "core". I believe the difference with Pharo is that their priority is to be modern and corporate-friendly. The way Pharo is being positioned is very good for Squeak because I believe it relieves Squeak itself from the pressures to corporate. Except from you man! Please, won't you ease up? :) The reality of "suitability for any particular purpose", be it educational or communiticating with industrial-grade switches to peform real-time call-routing, Squeak is out there doing these things, right now, this second, and have been for a long time. Squeakers/Smalltalkers/XP'ers rely heavily on manual and automated *testing* to determine the suitability of a system for a particular purpose, not marketing. I believe, even if Pharo is more corporate "friendly," Squeak is just still just as corporate "capable". True, for someone looking for, (I quote you here), "the way" to go, then Pharo is the one that suits you, and you've made that clear. But I think if you step back and and just watch the Squeak side, let the unencumbered imaginations over there run wild, you will witness some potentially great treasure to be harvested for Pharo in the future. Personally, I would like to see and assist this kind of exchange occur, wouldn't you? Cheers Miguel, - Chris 2010/3/6 Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez <[hidden email]>: > El vie, 05-03-2010 a las 15:45 -0800, Randal L. Schwartz escribió: >> >>>>> "Miguel" == Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez <[hidden email]> writes: >> >> Miguel> Then Squeak refuses to remove Etoys from base image, even is in process >> Miguel> the update and resync of Etoys with upstream squeakland code. >> >> I do believe the intent is to make etoys unloadable. If you've heard >> otherwise, can you poin at it, so that I can be up to date? > > Yes, it is unloadable since a month ago like someone else said, but that > doesn't make Squeak a vehicle for deploying commercial apps? Again, as > in another thread I said, the fact you can disassemble the image doesn't > mean that you want to disassemble it for deployment. > > The modularity is one thing. > The easy to deploy web/desktop images is also important. > You can give a full installed desktop linux server with gui and pidgin > and firefox and thunderbird and everything. That doesn't mean that I > would accept it for deploying my email server using it. I prefer to > start from a minimal linux install and add it only the email server. Not > search everything that I don't need and delete it manually. > > That is why I refer like not commercial-friendly. There is not roadmap > that you can rely in order to base your app for a couple of years if you > don't know what direction Squeak will be going with the new board. > > You don't have a defined board blessed support for oldstable images. > What will happen to current deployed 3.10 applications when 4.1 is out? > and when 4.2 is out? As you surely know, that is a very important thing > for selling a solution using Squeak. And the one-man minimal images > can't be relied on, (not because of the people behind that efforts they > are brilliant, but because the truck factor is crucial here) a community > effort is needed for the minimal images to be successful. > > You don't have well defined deployment setups (the ones that Torsten > have made for one-click install are very good, as are the ones that you > can find in the lists archives, but no one place where you can go and > review all your options for deployment and not just for using a Squeak > image) Check: http://rubyonrails.org/deploy is a link in the home page > of rails. for squeak you must search the lists. > > You don't have recipes for deploying Morphic apps, without all the > things you don't need to give your customers like squeakmap, universes, > monticello, etc. Again, we return to use the unload scripts and hope > that you get a working image. > > Finally I apologize for stating that Squeak don't care for uses other > than educational ones, but *my opinion* is that don't ease the use for > commercial uses either. > > > > >> >> Miguel> If the board refuses to remove etoys that is for me that they have a >> Miguel> preference for the educational use of squeak than the commercial use of >> Miguel> squeak. >> >> As a member of the board, I can tell you this is *not* an intent. >> > > -- > Miguel Cobá > http://miguel.leugim.com.mx > > > > |
Re: [Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!
|
|
Miguel,
I think that it is quite good that Squeak and Pharo attacking different market niches (or having different missions). As long as we pay attention to stay compatible, we are both win from it. We can keep talking about how they are different, or what going what. No problem. Just try to be nice and don't sell it as 'my toy is better than yours'. I think that both camps having very good goals and good teams/developers. And progress in different directions contributes to our overall progress. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. |
[Election] Candidate Questions - was Re: [Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!
|
|
In reply to this post by Andreas.Raab
Thanks to all those running for the election.
I would like to know what each candidate thinks about creating 'Terms of Reference' or 'Terms of Engagement' or 'Constitution' or 'Clear Governance Articles' or 'Rules and Regulations' for the Squeak Oversight Board, named something agreeable, along with a great mission statement. From <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-profit_organization>, I see some things to think about listed in the Legal aspects section. ie ... there are, nevertheless, some structural elements of prime legal importance: - Economic activity - Supervision and management provisions - Representation - Accountability and Auditing provisions - Provisions for the amendment of the statutes or articles of incorporation - Provisions for the dissolution of the entity - Tax status of corporate and private donors - Tax status of the foundation Maybe these do not apply exactly, but I would like to know what the candidates see as the most sensible path forward in this regard. Thx, Ken G. Brown At 9:23 PM -0800 3/4/10, Andreas Raab apparently wrote: >Thanks Göran. > >Since this is the campaigning period I'd like to invite people to ask questions. Most of the candidates have made statements about their interests and directions, so I feel the floor should be open for the community to ask questions. > >If there's anything you would like to know from the candidates before you cast your vote, now's a pretty good time to get some answers :-) > >Cheers, > - Andreas > >On 3/4/2010 5:37 AM, Göran Krampe wrote: >>Hi all! >> >>The candidates for the 2010 Squeak Oversight Board are now finalized and >>we have 11 brave souls in order of candidacy announcement: >> >>* Bert Freudenberg >>* Andreas Raab >>* Edgar De Cleene >>* Chris Muller >>* Jecel Assumpcao Jr >>* Matthew Fulmer >>* Juan Vuletich >>* Michael Haupt >>* Randal Schwartz >>* Gary Dunn >>* Craig Latta >> >>The election will produce 7 board members and leave 4 out of it until >>next year :) >> >>Now, there are 6 days left for campaigning until the actual ballots are >>sent out and voting starts. Voting goes on for a full week. >> >>Again, all details are on the wiki page below and if you didn't get a >>ballot last year then you need to get onto the voters list BEFORE the >>election starts! >> >>See: http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6150 >> >>regards, Göran |
Re: [Election] Candidate Questions - was Re: [Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!
|
|
>>>>> "Ken" == Ken G Brown <[hidden email]> writes:
Ken> I would like to know what each candidate thinks about creating 'Terms of Ken> Reference' or 'Terms of Engagement' or 'Constitution' or 'Clear Ken> Governance Articles' or 'Rules and Regulations' for the Squeak Oversight Ken> Board, named something agreeable, along with a great mission statement. I think this question was already asked and answered... as in, we brought it up on squeak-dev six months ago, and only a few people even bothered giving feedback, so the issue was declared complete, with other things more pressing. I understand that you *personally* disagree with that, but it seems you're in the minority here. If you need more guidance about what the SOB is about than what is listed on http://www.squeak.org/Foundation/ please make a concrete proposal. Otherwise, that describes precisely what I believe the SOB has been doing in the past two years I've been involved, and what I will ensure it continue doing, whether I'm elected to the new board or not. -- Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095 <[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/> Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc. See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion |
|
|
In reply to this post by Ken G. Brown
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 04:38:22PM -0700, Ken G. Brown wrote:
> I would like to know what each candidate thinks about creating > 'Terms of Reference' or 'Terms of Engagement' or > 'Constitution' or 'Clear Governance Articles' or 'Rules and > Regulations' for the Squeak Oversight Board, named something > agreeable, along with a great mission statement. My opinion is that the members elected to the board should do what they say they will do in their election statements. The community votes a set of people to the board, and also each person's agenda. The sum of the board member's stated agendas is what the board should be doing. The board only serves year terms, and can be replaced rather easily, should the community want to. Thus, I believe the above is sufficient to ensure that the board adequately represents the community. -- Matthew Fulmer (a.k.a. Tapple) |
|
|
I am against adding Terms of Reference because I don't see that it would
help - the problems we have had in the past would still have happened for a given set of rules, while for a different set of rules which would have avoided them we would have had far worse problems. What other open source projects have anything like this? Debian is the only one I can think of, and it is rather different. But my vote is just one, and I have no idea what the other 200 or so Squeakers think (only Ken and Keith have previously voiced their opinions, and now Matthew). If the community says it wants this, I would in no way oppose it. -- Jecel |
|
|
In reply to this post by Tapple Gao
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 07:01:24PM -0500, Matthew Fulmer wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 04:38:22PM -0700, Ken G. Brown wrote: > > I would like to know what each candidate thinks about creating > > 'Terms of Reference' or 'Terms of Engagement' or > > 'Constitution' or 'Clear Governance Articles' or 'Rules and > > Regulations' for the Squeak Oversight Board, named something > > agreeable, along with a great mission statement. > > My opinion is that the members elected to the board should do > what they say they will do in their election statements. The > community votes a set of people to the board, and also each > person's agenda. The sum of the board member's stated agendas is > what the board should be doing. > > The board only serves year terms, and can be replaced rather > easily, should the community want to. Thus, I believe the above > is sufficient to ensure that the board adequately represents the > community. An important corollary I feel is worth stating: If the board adequately represents the community, its actions will generally align with what the community as a whole wants. If the board is about anything, it is about helping Squeak move in the direction the community wants it to. The board nominees state what they think is most important for squeak, and if the community agrees and trusts them, they get elected. -- Matthew Fulmer (a.k.a. Tapple) |
|
|
On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 07:24:29PM -0500, Matthew Fulmer wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 07:01:24PM -0500, Matthew Fulmer wrote: > > On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 04:38:22PM -0700, Ken G. Brown wrote: > > > I would like to know what each candidate thinks about creating > > > 'Terms of Reference' or 'Terms of Engagement' or > > > 'Constitution' or 'Clear Governance Articles' or 'Rules and > > > Regulations' for the Squeak Oversight Board, named something > > > agreeable, along with a great mission statement. > > > > My opinion is that the members elected to the board should do > > what they say they will do in their election statements. The > > community votes a set of people to the board, and also each > > person's agenda. The sum of the board member's stated agendas is > > what the board should be doing. > > > > The board only serves year terms, and can be replaced rather > > easily, should the community want to. Thus, I believe the above > > is sufficient to ensure that the board adequately represents the > > community. > > An important corollary I feel is worth stating: > > If the board adequately represents the community, its actions > will generally align with what the community as a whole wants. > > If the board is about anything, it is about helping Squeak move > in the direction the community wants it to. The board nominees > state what they think is most important for squeak, and if the > community agrees and trusts them, they get elected. Absolutely right. And as a voting member of the Squeak community, I am 100% opposed to the idea of asking our volunteer board members to spend time and energy on "Terms of Engagement" and any other such pseudo-legalistic entitlement nonsense. We are fortunate to have the service of the current board members, and are doubly fortunate that many of them, as well as other new volunteers, are willing to stand for election this year. This has been a hugely positive year for Squeak, and I think next year will be even better :) Dave |
|
|
I think it's silly too.
On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 6:24 PM, David T. Lewis <[hidden email]> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 07:24:29PM -0500, Matthew Fulmer wrote: >> On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 07:01:24PM -0500, Matthew Fulmer wrote: >> > On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 04:38:22PM -0700, Ken G. Brown wrote: >> > > I would like to know what each candidate thinks about creating >> > > 'Terms of Reference' or 'Terms of Engagement' or >> > > 'Constitution' or 'Clear Governance Articles' or 'Rules and >> > > Regulations' for the Squeak Oversight Board, named something >> > > agreeable, along with a great mission statement. >> > >> > My opinion is that the members elected to the board should do >> > what they say they will do in their election statements. The >> > community votes a set of people to the board, and also each >> > person's agenda. The sum of the board member's stated agendas is >> > what the board should be doing. >> > >> > The board only serves year terms, and can be replaced rather >> > easily, should the community want to. Thus, I believe the above >> > is sufficient to ensure that the board adequately represents the >> > community. >> >> An important corollary I feel is worth stating: >> >> If the board adequately represents the community, its actions >> will generally align with what the community as a whole wants. >> >> If the board is about anything, it is about helping Squeak move >> in the direction the community wants it to. The board nominees >> state what they think is most important for squeak, and if the >> community agrees and trusts them, they get elected. > > Absolutely right. And as a voting member of the Squeak community, > I am 100% opposed to the idea of asking our volunteer board members > to spend time and energy on "Terms of Engagement" and any other > such pseudo-legalistic entitlement nonsense. We are fortunate > to have the service of the current board members, and are doubly > fortunate that many of them, as well as other new volunteers, > are willing to stand for election this year. > > This has been a hugely positive year for Squeak, and I think > next year will be even better :) > > Dave > > > -- Ron |
|
|
In reply to this post by David T. Lewis
> I am 100% opposed to the idea of asking our volunteer board members
> to spend time and energy on "Terms of Engagement" and any other > such pseudo-legalistic entitlement nonsense. We are fortunate > to have the service of the current board members, and are doubly > fortunate that many of them, as well as other new volunteers, > are willing to stand for election this year. 100% agreed Stef |
Re: [Election] Candidate Questions - was Re: [Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!
|
|
In reply to this post by Andreas.Raab
Ken,
good question. May I be so impolite as to answer with a counter-question and ask you what good it would be? What would be the benefit of having this? Who would benefit? What would be the consequences in terms of things happening to Squeak? How would Squeak improve? Why would it improve more with these things? If you want my opinion before you answer: I feel much like many of the other candidates. It wouldn't be a downright waste of time, but I really think valuable time can and should be spent on more down-to-earth things that actually make sense to the community and the project as a whole. Best, Michael |
Re: [Election] Candidate list with 11 candidates is final, 6 days until election starts!
|
|
In reply to this post by Miguel Cobá
Miguel,
2010/3/6 Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez <[hidden email]>: > Woa, and I am a troll because I listed the things I think that are > missing in Squeak in order to be easier to use it for commercial thing? no. I think the behavioral pattern that led Karl to his conclusion is your way of repeating the same statements over and over again even though people repeatedly point you to information that prove you wrong. > Amazed! Well... no, forget it. Once again to all, sorry for disturbing > your playfield. I promise myself not to ask nothing else here. I don't think that's necessary. Please be reasonable. Best, Michael |
|
|
2010/3/7 Michael Haupt <[hidden email]>:
> Miguel, > > 2010/3/6 Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez <[hidden email]>: >> Woa, and I am a troll because I listed the things I think that are >> missing in Squeak in order to be easier to use it for commercial thing? > > no. I think the behavioral pattern that led Karl to his conclusion is > your way of repeating the same statements over and over again even > though people repeatedly point you to information that prove you > wrong. > >> Amazed! Well... no, forget it. Once again to all, sorry for disturbing >> your playfield. I promise myself not to ask nothing else here. > > I don't think that's necessary. Please be reasonable. > +1 I'm working with both, Pharo and Squeak and don't feels myself excluded of none of two worlds. Is better to waste our energies on agreements, peace, fun :) By the way, Michael, thanks by your responses to my question about the candidates position, also thanks to other responders, unfortunately not much of the candidates are responding.... Well, they will get on votes what they deserve :) Germán. |
«
Return to Squeak - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |