Ownership of The Squeak Kernel and Brand

All,

I think this is an important topic to discuss regardless of what position one takes. Not discussing it isn't likely to make the issues go away or get handled in a manner agreeable to most. Even when there is a unified kernel that projects like Croquet, Sophie, Seaside, OLPC et al can chooose to build off of, it will still be possible to have variations. While one can choose to make a case that there need not be a single kernel, that doesn't address the brand issue. What will "Squeak kernel" mean if the one downloaded from squeak.org isn't the same as the one downloaded from squeakland.org? Which "Squeak kernel" will Croquet, Sophie et al build from?

The way I see it, in the more organic, "live" econet Spoon will enable, there's no need to have a single kernel - objects can modify behavior in whatever ways their creators see fit to allow. However, I think it would be much better for all if there is only one kernel with the word "squeak" in because people(that is who all of this is for after all) prefer reasonably unambiguous terminology. There are lots of ways to work this out in my view, but they all require dialog amongst the key stakeholders. That need not take place here, but I'm hoping(and requesting in the case of the Squeak Board which I voted for) that the stakeholders provide some public feedback as to whether they are willing to discuss it offline. Thoughts and comments welcome, on or offlist.

TIA,

Laurence

"Laurence Rozier" <[hidden email]> writes:
> I think this is an important topic to discuss regardless of what position
> one takes. Not discussing it isn't likely to make the issues go away or get
> handled in a manner agreeable to most. Even when there is a unified kernel
> that projects like Croquet, Sophie, Seaside, OLPC et al can chooose to build
> off of, it will still be possible to have variations. While one can choose
> to make a case that there need not be a single kernel, that doesn't address
> the brand issue. What will "Squeak kernel" mean if the one downloaded from
> squeak.org isn't the same as the one downloaded from squeakland.org? Which
> "Squeak kernel" will Croquet, Sophie et al build from?

I agree that the topic.  From afar, I guess that the direction will be
determined by the current board, the current mailing list, and the
folks actively using and contributing to Squeak.

A big question right now is whether Squeakland and OLPC are going to
be a part of it.  I guess Croquet, too, now that you mention it.

I think we should not be blaise when such groups start drifting away.
Our cool guys are leaving and the software engineers are taking over.
I love software engineering, and think Squeak is a great basis for
serious software development, but it would hate that to be all that we
are.  Besides, can't good software engineers come up with a way for
most of these projects to share code?  Isn't that a big part of what
software engineers are supposed to be good at?



> The way I see it, in the more organic, "live" econet Spoon will enable,
> there's no need to have a single kernel - objects can modify behavior in
> whatever ways their creators see fit to allow.

We are there already.  Such divisions go back at least to Morphic
Wrappers and MathMorphs.



-Lex

Lex Spoon wrote:
> I think we should not be blaise when such groups start drifting away.
> Our cool guys are leaving and the software engineers are taking over.
> I love software engineering, and think Squeak is a great basis for
> serious software development, but it would hate that to be all that we
> are.  Besides, can't good software engineers come up with a way for
> most of these projects to share code?  Isn't that a big part of what
> software engineers are supposed to be good at?
>

this is exactly the point. thanks for being so clear !

+1

Stef

On 02 Nov 2006 13:27:25 -0500, Lex Spoon <[hidden email]> wrote:
> are.  Besides, can't good software engineers come up with a way for
> most of these projects to share code?  Isn't that a big part of what
> software engineers are supposed to be good at?

There is a technical solution that already exists: monticello. Now the
social part is another problem...

--
Damien Pollet
type less, do more [ | ] http://typo.cdlm.fasmz.org