[squeak-dev] [ANN][Squeak-dev Images] Revival

> Hi all,
>
> last week, I published 2 polls (http://www.doodle.ch/5u67s53greapfdu6
> and http://www.doodle.ch/9y9r6nr2imci8g38) to help me know what you
> want for the squeak-dev images. From these polls, I can conclude that:
>
> - you are becoming more and more interested in 3.10
> - you believe some beta tools are stable enough to include in all
> images (Nice fonts, UI Enhancements and SUnitGUI-improved).
>
> However, I do not understand why so much people continue to download
> 3.9 based images. Maybe because there is the word 'beta' associated
> with 3.10 based images on my webpage.

> Hi all,
>
> last week, I published 2 polls (http://www.doodle.ch/5u67s53greapfdu6
> and http://www.doodle.ch/9y9r6nr2imci8g38) to help me know what you
> want for the squeak-dev images. From these polls, I can conclude that:
>
> - you are becoming more and more interested in 3.10
> - you believe some beta tools are stable enough to include in all
> images (Nice fonts, UI Enhancements and SUnitGUI-improved).
>
> However, I do not understand why so much people continue to download
> 3.9 based images.

> Maybe because there is the word 'beta' associated
> with 3.10 based images on my webpage.
>
> Here is my propositions for the future squeak-dev versions:
>
> - include Nice fonts, UI Enhancements and SUnitGUI-improved in all images
> - only base one image on top of 3.9 and update it less often. I still
> haven't decided if this image will contain the web stuffs or not. Any
> opinion?
> - create 2 stable dev- and web- images based on 3.10
> - create a beta 3.10 based dev-image. I plan to use Level Playing
> Field and Packages to generate this image. I will also put Algernon,
> the new Diff tools and other beta pakages in it.
>
> Could you please give me your opinion on these choices? Do I have to
> create another poll for something?

> On Wed, Jul 09, 2008 at 09:51:01AM +0200, Klaus D. Witzel wrote:
>> If you promise to not take it personal: this is a question I often hear  
>> in
>> the marketing department: why do people click the old stuff when their
>> answers in the survey clearly point to the new stuff. Response from the
>> WWW guy: these are most likely different (sub-)communities and we have  
>> no
>> technical tools for relating individual downloaders with individual  
>> survey
>> participants. Have a tool?
>
> This is very true. This community is trying to go many different
> directions at once, but instead of give each subgroup a vehicle
> to go further faster, we put them in one huge room (squeak.org).
> This is why I think forks are very important for the community:
> give each subgroup the perfect tool for their task. Want a lean
> mean seaside developing machine? Pharo is the fork for you. Need
> to have a great experience building presentations with squeak?
> use etoys. Need to get a package as widely distributed as
> possible? LPF can help with that. Wanna just see what's
> available? FunSqueak is what you want.
>
> That mostly leaves squeak.org with blue-plane researchers, who
> mostly need a kernel image that they can build anything on.
>
> Identifying sub-communities and giving them an optimized squeak
> for their needs will help us stop bickering about what should or
> should not be in the squeak.org release, because, really, there
> is no image that will satisfy everybody. However, there are only
> a dozen or so sub-communities striving to emerge, and each will
> be quite happy with one or two images with the average of what
> the members of that subcommunity want.

> On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 9:51 AM, Klaus D. Witzel wrote:
>>> However, I do not understand why so much people continue to download
>>> 3.9 based images.
>>
>> If you promise to not take it personal: this is a question I often hear  
>> in
>> the marketing department: why do people click the old stuff when their
>> answers in the survey clearly point to the new stuff. Response from the  
>> WWW
>> guy: these are most likely different (sub-)communities and we have no
>> technical tools for relating individual downloaders with individual  
>> survey
>> participants. Have a tool?
>
> Do you propose that I continue to listen to downloaders? This way, I
> will generate event more images and it might confuse the downloaders
> who are not subscribed to squeak-dev. I really don't know what to do.

>
>> The way you have it is one series for GUI-ers and another for Web-ers;  
>> for
>> me this is convenient and I don't want more.
>>
>> In order to address bleeding edge things (sorry for taking Algernon as
>> example) I propose to make a parallel line with *experimental* in the  
>> name.
>> Sounds better than beta.
>
> Ok for "experimental".

> On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 10:46 AM, Klaus D. Witzel  
> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Okay, you asked. Put your survey on the individual download page and
>> "demand" answers (to, "please help make you a better service"), in  
>> return of
>> enabling the submit button. This is a blend of needs of both sides,
>> community and publisher. Then you can relate answers to downloader's  
>> needs.
>
> I don't want to force the users to answer :-).

>
>> Anyways:
>>
>> Put atop the survey box: These images exist in 2 flavours, please help  
>> make
>> you a better service by answering these two polls before downloading.
>>
>> Put below the survex box: Click on a link to activate/initiate/"your  
>> term
>> here" the download now.
>
> What about http://damien.cassou.free.fr/squeak-dev.html?

> On Wed, 09 Jul 2008 14:29:27 +0200, Damien Cassou wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 2:16 PM, Klaus D. Witzel wrote:
>>>
>>> BTW, perhaps you want to put the above link into the ScriptManager's
>>> welcome
>>> (for convenience), and ask for feedback there too.
>>
>> Do you think anybody reads it?
>
> Short answer: yes, anybody is traditionally responsible for reading
> everything ;)
>
> Long answer: make a second page "thank you for using the publication, etc,
> here's new news, etc, subscribe here, etc, complain there, etc, you are
> elite now, etc", put its link into the ScriptManager's welcome, then watch
> the web server's access log.
>
> I know this is at times too much effort for (rather small) organizations,
> but it pays -- since *that* subcommunity is the most serious, they *use* a
> copy of the publication and not just store the download :) and, silence on
> this "post sales" channel would tell stories ;)