Quantcast

SOB minutes - 3/6/12

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
14 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

SOB minutes - 3/6/12

Chris Cunnington

- all members attending

- Election procedure was discussed:

  • since the Squeak People website is defunct a page listing all the eligible voters needs to be created and posted on squeak.org
  • might be similar to Sugar Labs (another SFC member project) http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Members/List
  • a person would be eligible to vote by having shown they’d made a contribution
  • as there is a conflict of interest, not the board, but the election team should approve contributors
  • possibly this could be automated, e.g. by adding a Squeak People-like network of trust to Squeak Map
  • this discussion needs to be public on Squeak-Dev

- A beta version of Etoys 5 has been released (http://squeakland.org/download)

- Colin discussed creating remote tools for work on a mini Squeak image:

  • While Smalltalk offers reflection, the ideal is to have a program as unaffected by its tools as a program is by a text editor
  • Colin uses a miniature image for the Atom feed of his website wiresong.ca. He built the image from Pavel’s core using the Mason build tool. He is planning to post a link to Squeak-Dev to allow people to download this image

- All members of the board are running for re-election with the exception of Jecel, who described his position at the last meeting

- Armed with a FreeBSD vm, Randal is in the process of creating a booking engine application or Insight Cruises and offered to post a link to the website when it’s done



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: SOB minutes - 3/6/12

Edgar J de Cleene



On 3/7/12 2:57 PM, "Chris Cunnington" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> * a person would be eligible to vote by having shown they¹d made a
> contribution


I think the list should be SqueakSource members who have at less one project
and this was active in the last year.

>  
> - Colin discussed creating remote tools for work on a mini Squeak image:
>  
> While Smalltalk offers reflection, the ideal is to have a program as
> unaffected by its tools as a program is by a text editor
> Colin uses a miniature image for the Atom feed of his website wiresong.ca. He
> built the image from Pavel¹s core using the Mason build tool. He is planning
> to post a link to Squeak-Dev to allow people to download this image

Great to see Colin also comes to reduced images kingdom.
Welcome and waiting so see his techniques and learn.


> - All members of the board are running for re-election with the exception of
> Jecel, who described his position at the last meeting

Great job all. Miss Jecel and sorry.

And also I wish to become a SOB member this year

Edgar



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: SOB minutes - 3/6/12

Chris Cunningham
On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Edgar J. De Cleene
<[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 3/7/12 2:57 PM, "Chris Cunnington" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> * a person would be eligible to vote by having shown they¹d made a
>> contribution
>
>
> I think the list should be SqueakSource members who have at less one project
> and this was active in the last year.
>
This is a great rule to include someone, but shouldn't be our only rule.

What about people who have directly added to the trunk (either via
committing directly, or to the inbox?)  What about people who help
with documentation?

Heck, what about lurkers that just use Squeak, and want to have a
chance to weigh in on a board that aligns with how they want Squeak to
go forward in the future (which is, more or less, where I fall)?

-Chris

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: SOB minutes - 3/6/12

Edgar J de Cleene



On 3/7/12 8:48 PM, "Chris Cunningham" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 3/7/12 2:57 PM, "Chris Cunnington" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> * a person would be eligible to vote by having shown they¹d made a
>>> contribution
>>
>>
>> I think the list should be SqueakSource members who have at less one project
>> and this was active in the last year.
>>
> This is a great rule to include someone, but shouldn't be our only rule.
I do not say it's the only rule
> What about people who have directly added to the trunk (either via
> committing directly, or to the inbox?)  What about people who help
> with documentation?
+1
> Heck, what about lurkers that just use Squeak, and want to have a
> chance to weigh in on a board that aligns with how they want Squeak to
> go forward in the future (which is, more or less, where I fall)?
+1
> -Chris
Chris , I wish all could vote.

I dream about in 2014 we could have Smalltalks in my city Rosario and in the
Rosario Central stadium with 40.000 plus fans screaming "Squeak "

Edgar



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: SOB minutes - 3/6/12

Jecel Assumpcao Jr.
In reply to this post by Edgar J de Cleene
Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:
> On 3/7/12 2:57 PM, Chris Cunnington wrote:
>
> > * a person would be eligible to vote by having shown they¹d made a
> > contribution
>
>
> I think the list should be SqueakSource members who have at less one project
> and this was active in the last year.

Actually, though we did discuss possible alternatives for defining who
could vote we thought it would be best to have this list decide (this is
mentioned in the items following this one in the meeting minutes). The
stuff about making a contribution is just one example - it is what Sugar
Labs uses and they are also a member project of the SFC.

In practice, we have used in the past few years the informal solution of
starting out with the previous year's list and adding to it people who
send an email to Göran with at least a hint of why they should be added.
It would be better to be at least a little more formal than this.

Demanding a contribution is more complicated than it seems. See

http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Members

and

http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Sugar_Labs/Members/List

I am on this list though I have not contributed one line of code to
Sugar. My participation was helping out with the OLPC booth in Brazil
back in 2006 and some rare comments in their mailing lists. In fact,
there is not any code in any official Squeak image with my developer
initials on it either, but I think at least in this community I have
helped out enough to be a voter and even a board member.

So though it would be simple to implement some automated process to scan
squeaksource and compile a list of voters I think we can't avoid having
some subjective rules as well.

-- Jecel


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Voters (was: SOB minutes - 3/6/12)

Bert Freudenberg
In reply to this post by Chris Cunningham
On 07.03.2012, at 23:48, Chris Cunningham wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Edgar J. De Cleene
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 3/7/12 2:57 PM, "Chris Cunnington" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> * a person would be eligible to vote by having shown they¹d made a
>>> contribution
>>
>>
>> I think the list should be SqueakSource members who have at less one project
>> and this was active in the last year.
>>
> This is a great rule to include someone, but shouldn't be our only rule.

Right.

> What about people who have directly added to the trunk (either via
> committing directly, or to the inbox?)  What about people who help
> with documentation?

Definitely.

> Heck, what about lurkers that just use Squeak, and want to have a
> chance to weigh in on a board that aligns with how they want Squeak to
> go forward in the future (which is, more or less, where I fall)?
>
> -Chris


IMHO people need to be able to show *some* contribution to the community. That does not have to be code, but they need to be actively involved, or have been actively involved in the past.

The bar should be low, but there should be a bar. I think there should be a public list of names on the website. Those on the list can vote. To get on the list, send an email to the election team, and say why you think you should be on the list. The election team would approve or reject the request (but I expect there will be very very few rejections, if at all).

How does that sound? And who would volunteer to be on the election team, to help out Göran?

- Bert -



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Voters (was: SOB minutes - 3/6/12)

Karl Ramberg


On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
On 07.03.2012, at 23:48, Chris Cunningham wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Edgar J. De Cleene
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 3/7/12 2:57 PM, "Chris Cunnington" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> * a person would be eligible to vote by having shown they¹d made a
>>> contribution
>>
>>
>> I think the list should be SqueakSource members who have at less one project
>> and this was active in the last year.
>>
> This is a great rule to include someone, but shouldn't be our only rule.

Right.

> What about people who have directly added to the trunk (either via
> committing directly, or to the inbox?)  What about people who help
> with documentation?

Definitely.

> Heck, what about lurkers that just use Squeak, and want to have a
> chance to weigh in on a board that aligns with how they want Squeak to
> go forward in the future (which is, more or less, where I fall)?
>
> -Chris


IMHO people need to be able to show *some* contribution to the community. That does not have to be code, but they need to be actively involved, or have been actively involved in the past.

The bar should be low, but there should be a bar. I think there should be a public list of names on the website. Those on the list can vote. To get on the list, send an email to the election team, and say why you think you should be on the list. The election team would approve or reject the request (but I expect there will be very very few rejections, if at all).

How does that sound? And who would volunteer to be on the election team, to help out Göran?

- Bert -



Sounds good, Bert.
 
My plate is quite full at the moment so I can't help out with election.

Karl




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: SOB minutes - 3/6/12

Stéphane Rollandin
In reply to this post by Edgar J de Cleene

>> * a person would be eligible to vote by having shown they¹d made a
>> contribution
>
>
> I think the list should be SqueakSource members who have at less one project
> and this was active in the last year.

Or SqueakMap..

Stef


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: SOB minutes - 3/6/12

Casey Ransberger-2
In reply to this post by Chris Cunningham
I shipped Squeak once, but my code contributions to Squeak mainline have been minimal.

I recommend continuing the practice of allowing anyone who voted last time to vote again.

It's worth noting that I agree with Mr. Cunningham. I think end users, not just developers, should also have a voice.

On Mar 7, 2012, at 2:48 PM, Chris Cunningham <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Edgar J. De Cleene
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> On 3/7/12 2:57 PM, "Chris Cunnington" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> * a person would be eligible to vote by having shown they¹d made a
>>> contribution
>>
>>
>> I think the list should be SqueakSource members who have at less one project
>> and this was active in the last year.
>>
> This is a great rule to include someone, but shouldn't be our only rule.
>
> What about people who have directly added to the trunk (either via
> committing directly, or to the inbox?)  What about people who help
> with documentation?
>
> Heck, what about lurkers that just use Squeak, and want to have a
> chance to weigh in on a board that aligns with how they want Squeak to
> go forward in the future (which is, more or less, where I fall)?
>
> -Chris
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: SOB minutes - 3/6/12

Edgar J de Cleene



On 3/8/12 6:53 PM, "Casey Ransberger" <[hidden email]> wrote:

>  I think end users, not just developers, should also have a voice.
+1

Edgar



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Election Team (was Re: [squeak-dev] Voters (was: SOB minutes - 3/6/12))

Casey Ransberger-2
In reply to this post by Bert Freudenberg
Top post: what work needs doing on the election team? I may have a small bit of time to contribute, depending.

On Mar 8, 2012, at 3:02 AM, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 07.03.2012, at 23:48, Chris Cunningham wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Mar 7, 2012 at 11:22 AM, Edgar J. De Cleene
>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> On 3/7/12 2:57 PM, "Chris Cunnington" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> * a person would be eligible to vote by having shown they¹d made a
>>>> contribution
>>>
>>>
>>> I think the list should be SqueakSource members who have at less one project
>>> and this was active in the last year.
>>>
>> This is a great rule to include someone, but shouldn't be our only rule.
>
> Right.
>
>> What about people who have directly added to the trunk (either via
>> committing directly, or to the inbox?)  What about people who help
>> with documentation?
>
> Definitely.
>
>> Heck, what about lurkers that just use Squeak, and want to have a
>> chance to weigh in on a board that aligns with how they want Squeak to
>> go forward in the future (which is, more or less, where I fall)?
>>
>> -Chris
>
>
> IMHO people need to be able to show *some* contribution to the community. That does not have to be code, but they need to be actively involved, or have been actively involved in the past.
>
> The bar should be low, but there should be a bar. I think there should be a public list of names on the website. Those on the list can vote. To get on the list, send an email to the election team, and say why you think you should be on the list. The election team would approve or reject the request (but I expect there will be very very few rejections, if at all).
>
> How does that sound? And who would volunteer to be on the election team, to help out Göran?
>
> - Bert -
>
>
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: SOB minutes - 3/6/12

Casey Ransberger-2
In reply to this post by Edgar J de Cleene
Below.

On Mar 8, 2012, at 12:14 PM, "Edgar J. De Cleene" <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
>
> On 3/8/12 6:53 PM, "Casey Ransberger" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I think end users, not just developers, should also have a voice.
> +1
>
> Edgar

Worth noting: there's no framework for end users to make their voices heard. Seems they don't post on squeak-dev much and they don't post on the beginner list either. There's a silent majority at work here...

Someone suggested making the beginner list squeak-users some time ago, and I thought that was a good idea. The word "beginner" is liable to run off good minds.

Random thoughts.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Where are the users ? (was Re: [squeak-dev] SOB minutes - 3/6/12)

Edgar J de Cleene



On 3/8/12 8:49 PM, "Casey Ransberger" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Worth noting: there's no framework for end users to make their voices heard.
> Seems they don't post on squeak-dev much and they don't post on the beginner
> list either. There's a silent majority at work here...
>
> Someone suggested making the beginner list squeak-users some time ago, and I
> thought that was a good idea. The word "beginner" is liable to run off good
> minds.
>
> Random thoughts.


Maybe no frameworks but users groups.
We have http://ar.groups.yahoo.com/group/squeakRos/ and pretend to be a
"Virtual Bar and Café"
Sure exist such groups in several places .
I do not check about OLPC, but we should have millions of users now...
Once I dream about doing Skype with children's and teachers in U.S.A.
Exchange live experiences , teach and learn

More Random thoughts

Edgar



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: SOB minutes - 3/6/12

Mark P. McCahill-2
In reply to this post by Edgar J de Cleene

> On 3/8/12 6:53 PM, "Casey Ransberger" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I think end users, not just developers, should also have a voice.

+1




Loading...