[squeak-dev] Squeak vision
Locked
12345
12345
 
|
On 01.07.2009, at 06:28, Igor Stasenko wrote:
> 2009/7/1 Ramon Leon <[hidden email]>: >>> Bert, are you serious? >>> >>> Enough with the children! It's been done and redone and overdone. >>> The >>> past and the future confounded. Why can't we live the present >>> living? >>> You're talking about something that might (or might not) produce >>> engineers in the next, say, 20 years? Smalltalk will be around 50 >>> years by then. I find it painful that our community wouldn't be a >>> little bit more practical, for a change.. >>> >>> Right here, right now. >>> >>> Ian. >>> >>> PS: I am so sorry... I don't even have spare children to furiously >>> train on Squeak... >>> >>> -- >>> http://mecenia.blogspot.com/ >> >> +10 >> >> Seriously, stop talking about kids, who cares, I'll be retired by the >> time they're useful. Programming languages are tools that are >> primarily used by and useful for adults, they should be aimed at >> adults. I want Smalltalk to be usable now, not at some unspecified >> time in some imaginary future where it takes over the world by >> getting >> kids before they've been introduced to other environments. It's pure >> fantasy to think this'll happen, it won't. This is the attitude that >> holds Squeak back and prevents anyone from taking it too seriously. >> This is why Pharo will continue to steal mind-share and Squeak will >> die. This is so short-sighted I shouldn't even respond. Most kids fortunately do not live on their own. They have parents and teachers. Some of those are or have connections to developers. We are already starting to see growing interest in Squeak from developers worldwide because of that. Right here, right now. You might notice Squeak is getting packaged into various Linux distributions now. You think that's fantasy? > +10. > Let us separate the domains: > 1. Squeak for developers who need a modern & sound smalltalk > environment which fullfills their needs and > 2. Squeak for teachers/children/endusers who will use a wonderfull > environment produced by software engineers. > > If you don't have 1st, you can't progress in 2nd, because obviously > developers do not like sitting in child room and pretend that they are > sitting in the lab. I came to Squeak and stuck around for more than 10 years now because it always felt like a project with a vision. A vision that goes way beyond the simple-minded "I want something like the other guys have just a little bit nicer". If Alan's group started with that theme 40 years ago we would not have Smalltalk now. Mind you, I never implied that work should stop to improve Squeak in the here-and-now (go back and read what I wrote). But for me every improvement fits into a larger context. Squeak is a versatile tool for everybody. I've seen professional developers get excited about it as much as elementary school kids, high-school students, and PhD candidates. It's just a simple fact that the more "conventional wisdom" people have acquired, the harder it gets for them to appreciate the beauty of Squeak (and I happily admit that making the programmers' UI look less ancient would go a long way to make them give a second look). Being an environment for professionals and learners alike has always been a strong point of Squeak. There is no unresolvable tension there that I can see. For example, the Etoys team started 2 years ago to develop a product that got shipped to 500 thousand users by now, soon it will be a million. They did that with only a handful of developers working part-time. Sticking to the base system version they started out with was the only option (as everybody who ever did serious product development can relate to). Now that the hot development phase is over, the changes can be folded back into Squeak proper. I'm glad the Squeak community is made of individuals who care for different aspects of the system. Together we are creating a truly unique computing environment. And fortunately, there is a new home for those who cannot bear their "professional system" being marred by crayons here and there. Have fun with Pharo if that's all you ever wanted from Squeak. Seriously, enjoy it. Just don't bother those who think living under the same roof with kids isn't all that bad. - Bert - |
|
|
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> I'm glad the Squeak community is made of individuals who care for > different aspects of the system. Together we are creating a truly unique > computing environment. And fortunately, there is a new home for those > who cannot bear their "professional system" being marred by crayons here > and there. Have fun with Pharo if that's all you ever wanted from > Squeak. Seriously, enjoy it. Just don't bother those who think living > under the same roof with kids isn't all that bad. What a nice way of saying that! My gut reaction was: If you think Squeak is dead then get the @#!^ off this list. We don't need people who think Squeak is dead, we need people who will help improving it :-) Cheers, - Andreas |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bert Freudenberg
Hi,
BF> Being an environment for professionals and learners alike has always BF> been a strong point of Squeak. There is no unresolvable tension there when the counting starts i'm in the fraction who use Squeak because of its (unique) combination of both sides. I'm still on 3.8 because in younger versions the creative part lost too much imho. Oh and maintaining a product approaching its 20'th birthday I'm a bit on the conservative side too. Cheers, Herbert mailto:[hidden email] |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bert Freudenberg
Hi guys!
Ok, not sure where to start here but... I just *have* to respond. Ramon Leon wrote: >>> Seriously, stop talking about kids, who cares, Ahum, a LOT of us do! That should be evident given the history of Smalltalk and Squeak. And no, I have actually personally done *very* little in that direction in Squeak - but I still am aware that a LOT of us do. And that we benefit greatly. >>> I'll be retired by the >>> time they're useful. Kinda odd thing to say, but hey, fingers are fast. :) >>> Programming languages are tools that are >>> primarily used by and useful for adults, they should be aimed at >>> adults. ...which simply is not true, well, depending on how much weight you give the word "primarily". I started programming when I was 12, I furiously hacked nights through on my C64. Both in Basic and Assembler. And if something like eToys had been introduced to me I could probably have thrown myself over it much earlier than at 12 years of age. AND... no, I didn't build a stock broker system (if for some kind of definition such a system can be labelled as "useful"). But I am pretty sure it was very beneficial to me in many ways. So it was very "useful" to me. >>> I want Smalltalk to be usable now, not at some unspecified >>> time in some imaginary future where it takes over the world by getting >>> kids before they've been introduced to other environments. Smalltalk and Squeak IS usable now. I can't see the contradiction. >>> It's pure >>> fantasy to think this'll happen, it won't. Eh... well, unless OLPC went by totally unnoticed it is quite clear that kids of all ages are getting more and more access to computers. And the lack of good tools in that age group is quite clear too, eToys and/or Smalltalk is not the whole story of course - but there is an important niche that eToys actually is filling to some extent (half million kids is a LOT). >>> This is the attitude that >>> holds Squeak back and prevents anyone from taking it too seriously. >>> This is why Pharo will continue to steal mind-share and Squeak will >>> die. I don't think THAT is the reason for Pharo stealing mindshare. Honestly. Bert Freudenberg wrote: > This is so short-sighted I shouldn't even respond. I responded to show that the views of Ian and Ramon are NOT representative of the whole community. And I will always stand up for Bert :) - he has done more for Squeak than most of us will ever do. I also think that the conflict that Ian and Ramon is "painting" is not really there, we can make Squeak more "modernly attractive" without sacrificing the vision. And people, please keep eToys (ONE end user tool primarily for kids) and Squeak (the base platform) separate. The latter should support the development of the former - but they are not the same. Bert wrote (lots of good stuff snipped): > I'm glad the Squeak community is made of individuals who care for > different aspects of the system. Together we are creating a truly unique > computing environment. And fortunately, there is a new home for those > who cannot bear their "professional system" being marred by crayons here > and there. Have fun with Pharo if that's all you ever wanted from > Squeak. Seriously, enjoy it. Just don't bother those who think living > under the same roof with kids isn't all that bad. Hehe, well put. regards, Göran |
Re: [squeak-dev] Squeak vision
|
|
In reply to this post by Bert Freudenberg
Creators build worlds, visions, grand stuff. Predators take beautiful
and deep things, rip away everything they don't need or understand, shit everywhere, and go away with the tiny bit of stuff that they wanted, leaving a mess behind. Projects like Squeak are a wonder at their beginnings: only creators are interested in them, and developping them. Then they become known to a larger circle, and after a while some people start saying: "it would be nice if we had that large share of market". Or "Lisp is good, but there are too many parentheses". At this point the creators should really start to worry. The predators have entered the place. Stef |
|
|
Stéphane Rollandin wrote:
> Creators build worlds, visions, grand stuff. Predators take beautiful > and deep things, rip away everything they don't need or understand, > shit everywhere, and go away with the tiny bit of stuff that they > wanted, leaving a mess behind. > > Projects like Squeak are a wonder at their beginnings: only creators > are interested in them, and developping them. Then they become known > to a larger circle, and after a while some people start saying: "it > would be nice if we had that large share of market". Or "Lisp is good, > but there are too many parentheses". At this point the creators should > really start to worry. The predators have entered the place. good job so far of expressing that frustration without blowing a fuse. I'm sure there are many who share your frustration (if for different reasons). Let's try work together to build something of use for the whole community. frank |
Re: [squeak-dev] Squeak vision
|
|
yes, peace and love. hug people despising children. there is no problem.
close your eyes. there is no problem. repeat again: there is no problem. Stef |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bert Freudenberg
Hi all,
I've been reading this thread with interest, and more than a little cynicism. It seems like we've had this discussion about once a year or so ever since I've been part of the community, and probably longer than that. Eventually they fizzle out without resolution and life goes on. I'm starting to think, though, that the stars are aligning so that Squeak can move forward again. Consider: 1. We finally have a replacement for Squeak Central. Part of the reason Squeak has been drifting is lack of leadership. Squeak Central used to provide that, but all the folks that were part of it have moved on, and can't devote much time to the administrivia that leadership inevitably involves. We went through several rounds of other people attempting to fill that void, without a whole lot of success. But I think the Squeak Oversite Board is finally in a position to provide a centre to the community. After several rounds of elections, terms serve by the board members, and succession by new board members, I think it's clear to all that as a system of governance that the SOB is working. The board are legitimately chosen representatives of the community, they are accountable and responsive to all the factions within the community, and they can provide the continuity we need to sustain forward motion. 2. The license has been fixed. With the APSL and now MIT relicensing effort, we're finally in a position to relate to the rest of the world in well-understood ways. The Squeak-L wasn't a complete show-stopper, but it *was* holding us back. Under the MIT licence, it's obvious to everybody that Squeak is safe for business use and we can easily play well with the rest of the open source world. Those things are crucial if we want to grow the community and have an impact on the world. Being able to join the Software Freedom Conservancy is the icing on that cake; it gives us a legal entity to hang Squeak on, rather than just a mob of individuals. 3. We've made some technical progress, albeit outside the umbrella of "Squeak". A lot of work has been done for Pharo, Cuis, Squeakland, Croquet and Sophie, and all of it (AFAIK) is available to the larger community. Newspeak gave us a shiny new FFI, Cog has produced the Closure VM. It'll be quite a bit of gunt work to sift out the gold there and get it all in one place, but there's a lot of really good stuff there. 4. Squeak is becoming more and more important within the larger Smalltalk community. I notice this because of my involvement in cross- platform projects - Seaside, Monticello, OmniBrowser. It's getting easier and easier to write cross-platform code, because Squeak provides a compatibility layer. When porting something like Seaside to other platforms, the big issue is compatibility between lower level image code in the different dialects. The easiest way to overcome that is to provide an interface that looks like Squeak, because Squeak's licensing lets you use the actual Squeak code to implement it. If we wanted, say, a package that makes Squeak more compatible with VW, it would be more work to implement because we couldn't use any VW code. As a result, Squeak is the lingua franca of Smalltalk dialects, and folks from those other dialects have an interest in the quality of the code in Squeak. 5. Squeak has made an impact in the larger world recently. Seaside is getting attention in the web-dev community. Etoys has hundreds of thousands of users, and has begun to make inroads in to the linux distributions. Dabble DB and Croquet make people take Smalltalk seriously. What I'd really like to see is a linux-like model for Squeak. The SOB should be responsible for maintaining the VM, a minimal bootstrapping image, and a set of core libraries. These, in turn, should be made available to "distributions" like Pharo, Cuis, Squeakland. There would probably also be "invisible" distributions used by comercial entities. A lot of development work would happen in the distributions and get pushed back upstream, but significant projects like compiler changes, closure support, Spoon etc. could be organized by the SOB. This isn't a new vision, of course, we've supposedly being trying to achieve this for a number of years. But we've been stymied by two things, I think. One is resistance to modularization. There are still folks who like the way things worked under Squeak Central and the would like to see a return to the monolithic image driven by the update stream. I think the Squeak universe is too big for that model to work anymore, but it's certainly possible that tightly focused distributions could be created that work that way. The other is backwards compatibility, which we've been discussing extensively on this thread. I'm particularly heartened by this comment by Bert Freudenberg: > Being an environment for professionals and learners alike has always > been a strong point of Squeak. There is no unresolvable tension > there that I can see. For example, the Etoys team started 2 years > ago to develop a product that got shipped to 500 thousand users by > now, soon it will be a million. They did that with only a handful of > developers working part-time. Sticking to the base system version > they started out with was the only option (as everybody who ever did > serious product development can relate to). Now that the hot > development phase is over, the changes can be folded back into > Squeak proper. Perhaps the way forward is to excise Etoys from Squeak, Pharo-style, then port back the Squeakland version of Etoys along with some of their patches to the base image. However it's accomplished, I'd really like to see this happen. Despite the coolness of Seaside, Etoys is still Squeak's killer app, and I'd really like to see the whole community benefit from its success. Like Bert, I believe that there's no fundamental conflict between the needs of educational and professional users of Squeak. Etoys is an application that runs on Squeak, and would benefit as much as any other from improvements to the VM and core libraries. Colin |
Re: [squeak-dev] Squeak vision
|
|
2009/7/1 Colin Putney <[hidden email]>:
> .... > 4. Squeak is becoming more and more important within the larger Smalltalk > community. I notice this because of my involvement in cross-platform > projects - Seaside, Monticello, OmniBrowser. It's getting easier and easier > to write cross-platform code, because Squeak provides a compatibility layer. > When porting something like Seaside to other platforms, the big issue is > compatibility between lower level image code in the different dialects. The > easiest way to overcome that is to provide an interface that looks like > Squeak, because Squeak's licensing lets you use the actual Squeak code to > implement it. If we wanted, say, a package that makes Squeak more compatible > with VW, it would be more work to implement because we couldn't use any VW > code. As a result, Squeak is the lingua franca of Smalltalk dialects, and > folks from those other dialects have an interest in the quality of the code > in Squeak. We try hard not to force Squeak-isms on other dialects. It's not always easy and there's certainly room for improvement but we're working our way there. We try to orient ourselves on ANSI which pushes the dialects to implement ASNI ;-) Cheers Philippe |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bert Freudenberg
2009/7/1 Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]>:
> > I'm glad the Squeak community is made of individuals who care for different > aspects of the system. Together we are creating a truly unique computing > environment. And fortunately, there is a new home for those who cannot bear > their "professional system" being marred by crayons here and there. Have fun > with Pharo if that's all you ever wanted from Squeak. Seriously, enjoy it. > Just don't bother those who think living under the same roof with kids isn't > all that bad. > > - Bert - > > > +10 I never understood what is the bad side of having a learning/teaching system together with a web development environment. I collaborated for years with the now stopped SmallLand project (http://swiki.agro.uba.ar/small_land) and used the same colorful image of SmallLand to make web development, stripped what I need to deploy on production, used the full image to develop eToys and I never had a problem by that. I sitll have some of these 3.8 images on production. The problems, to my pov, started when the images begin being cut off. Not much time ago I asked by some multimedia stuff not more present and......what is the bad of use the same environment to make different types of software? -- Germán S. Arduino http://www.arsol.biz http://www.arsol.net |
Re: [squeak-dev] Squeak vision
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Rollandin
Hello,
2009/7/1 Stéphane Rollandin <[hidden email]> yes, peace and love. hug people despising children. there is no problem. close your eyes. there is no problem. repeat again: there is no problem. "Kid/Child" = ready to be Just In Time creative, selfless, ready for the act of bravery... And the philosophy of Squeak is based on self-exploratory environment's principals at first! So, this means, that "2 years old kid".. or "60 years old kid" could/should interact with it without any help of "old man - programmer" or "angry wizard", who often pursuing just only personal business-oriented interests, by developing the "matrix" and providing the infinite row of services, like: "close your eyes. there is no problem. repeat again.." So, do not confuse please, Squeak in it's way of Etoys/Croquet/Lively has a fundamental and significant goal (and not just connected with education). That's why it requires from the developer to be "kid" at first, and then to be an artist, psychologist, teacher, scientist.. etc. all in one, which is not really a trivial task for the "real programmers", living the most time of life on the "left hemisphere of brain". Regards, Nikolay |
|
|
In reply to this post by Colin Putney
Hi Colin and all!
I just want to say "Amen". And hey, I am an atheist so it takes a really good post for me to say that. :) regards, Göran PS. I have 11 failures (of 181) in SE tests in 3.10.2, anything you know about? |
Re: [squeak-dev] Squeak vision
|
|
In reply to this post by Bert Freudenberg
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> > I came to Squeak and stuck around for more than 10 years now because > it always felt like a project with a vision. A vision that goes way > beyond the simple-minded "I want something like the other guys have > just a little bit nicer". If Alan's group started with that theme 40 > years ago we would not have Smalltalk now. > > Mind you, I never implied that work should stop to improve Squeak in > the here-and-now (go back and read what I wrote). But for me every > improvement fits into a larger context. > > Squeak is a versatile tool for everybody. I've seen professional > developers get excited about it as much as elementary school kids, > high-school students, and PhD candidates. It's just a simple fact that > the more "conventional wisdom" people have acquired, the harder it > gets for them to appreciate the beauty of Squeak (and I happily admit > that making the programmers' UI look less ancient would go a long way > to make them give a second look). > > Being an environment for professionals and learners alike has always > been a strong point of Squeak. There is no unresolvable tension there > that I can see. For example, the Etoys team started 2 years ago to > develop a product that got shipped to 500 thousand users by now, soon > it will be a million. They did that with only a handful of developers > working part-time. Sticking to the base system version they started > out with was the only option (as everybody who ever did serious > product development can relate to). Now that the hot development phase > is over, the changes can be folded back into Squeak proper. > > I'm glad the Squeak community is made of individuals who care for > different aspects of the system. Together we are creating a truly > unique computing environment. And fortunately, there is a new home for > those who cannot bear their "professional system" being marred by > crayons here and there. Have fun with Pharo if that's all you ever > wanted from Squeak. Seriously, enjoy it. Just don't bother those who > think living under the same roof with kids isn't all that bad. > > - Bert - > In http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2009-June/136568.html I could not find the right word. It is "Vision". Squeak indeed has a vision. Thank you Bert! Cheers, Juan Vuletich |
Re: [squeak-dev] Squeak vision
|
|
In reply to this post by Nikolay Suslov
That is very well said.
Stef |
Re: [squeak-dev] Squeak vision
|
|
In reply to this post by Colin Putney
Colin Putney wrote:
> ... (lots of good stuff snipped) > > What I'd really like to see is a linux-like model for Squeak. The SOB > should be responsible for maintaining the VM, a minimal bootstrapping > image, and a set of core libraries. These, in turn, should be made > available to "distributions" like Pharo, Cuis, Squeakland. There would > probably also be "invisible" distributions used by comercial entities. > A lot of development work would happen in the distributions and get > pushed back upstream, but significant projects like compiler changes, > closure support, Spoon etc. could be organized by the SOB. If this is achieved, Cuis is no longer needed as a distribution. Instead, I suggest considering Cuis as the starting point for the minimal image / core libraries. > This isn't a new vision, of course, we've supposedly being trying to > achieve this for a number of years. But we've been stymied by two > things, I think. One is resistance to modularization. There are still > folks who like the way things worked under Squeak Central and the > would like to see a return to the monolithic image driven by the > update stream. I think the Squeak universe is too big for that model > to work anymore, but it's certainly possible that tightly focused > distributions could be created that work that way. Bert beautifully stated the Vision. This would be the Agenda. What you say also asks for a clear statement from our leaders. > ... (additional good stuff snipped) > > Colin Cheers, Juan Vuletich |
|
|
Juan Vuletich wrote:
> Colin Putney wrote: >> ... (lots of good stuff snipped) >> >> What I'd really like to see is a linux-like model for Squeak. The SOB >> should be responsible for maintaining the VM, a minimal bootstrapping >> image, and a set of core libraries. These, in turn, should be made >> available to "distributions" like Pharo, Cuis, Squeakland. There would >> probably also be "invisible" distributions used by comercial entities. >> A lot of development work would happen in the distributions and get >> pushed back upstream, but significant projects like compiler changes, >> closure support, Spoon etc. could be organized by the SOB. > > If this is achieved, Cuis is no longer needed as a distribution. > Instead, I suggest considering Cuis as the starting point for the > minimal image / core libraries. Ah... that would indeed be an interesting route. I will surely take a look at Cuis! regards, Göran |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bert Freudenberg
2009/7/1 Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]>:
> On 01.07.2009, at 06:28, Igor Stasenko wrote: > >> 2009/7/1 Ramon Leon <[hidden email]>: >>>> >>>> Bert, are you serious? >>>> >>>> Enough with the children! It's been done and redone and overdone. The >>>> past and the future confounded. Why can't we live the present living? >>>> You're talking about something that might (or might not) produce >>>> engineers in the next, say, 20 years? Smalltalk will be around 50 >>>> years by then. I find it painful that our community wouldn't be a >>>> little bit more practical, for a change.. >>>> >>>> Right here, right now. >>>> >>>> Ian. >>>> >>>> PS: I am so sorry... I don't even have spare children to furiously >>>> train on Squeak... >>>> >>>> -- >>>> http://mecenia.blogspot.com/ >>> >>> +10 >>> >>> Seriously, stop talking about kids, who cares, I'll be retired by the >>> time they're useful. Programming languages are tools that are >>> primarily used by and useful for adults, they should be aimed at >>> adults. I want Smalltalk to be usable now, not at some unspecified >>> time in some imaginary future where it takes over the world by getting >>> kids before they've been introduced to other environments. It's pure >>> fantasy to think this'll happen, it won't. This is the attitude that >>> holds Squeak back and prevents anyone from taking it too seriously. >>> This is why Pharo will continue to steal mind-share and Squeak will >>> die. > > This is so short-sighted I shouldn't even respond. Most kids fortunately do > not live on their own. They have parents and teachers. Some of those are or > have connections to developers. We are already starting to see growing > interest in Squeak from developers worldwide because of that. Right here, > right now. You might notice Squeak is getting packaged into various Linux > distributions now. You think that's fantasy? > >> +10. >> Let us separate the domains: >> 1. Squeak for developers who need a modern & sound smalltalk >> environment which fullfills their needs and >> 2. Squeak for teachers/children/endusers who will use a wonderfull >> environment produced by software engineers. >> >> If you don't have 1st, you can't progress in 2nd, because obviously >> developers do not like sitting in child room and pretend that they are >> sitting in the lab. > > > I came to Squeak and stuck around for more than 10 years now because it > always felt like a project with a vision. A vision that goes way beyond the > simple-minded "I want something like the other guys have just a little bit > nicer". If Alan's group started with that theme 40 years ago we would not > have Smalltalk now. > > Mind you, I never implied that work should stop to improve Squeak in the > here-and-now (go back and read what I wrote). But for me every improvement > fits into a larger context. > I never implied that we should drop supporting an educational software for squeak (eToys & friends). Just tell me: who is currently maintains eToys in Squeak 3.10.2? If there's no-one, then wouldn't it be better to cut it out and integrate later as a separate module/package (whatever you think is fits for it) by people who cares? When i come to shop to buy a bread & taking it to the cash desk, is there anyone yelling at me, that i'm also need to pay for a bicycle, because bread is not selling as a separate product? Please understand me, i have nothing against eToys. But i treat eToys as an application on Squeak platform, not as a core part of it. And i thinking that it should play under a common rules as any other applications do: keep it as separate package. Othewise, how many people next time will go to this shop for buying a bread? > Squeak is a versatile tool for everybody. I've seen professional developers > get excited about it as much as elementary school kids, high-school > students, and PhD candidates. It's just a simple fact that the more > "conventional wisdom" people have acquired, the harder it gets for them to > appreciate the beauty of Squeak (and I happily admit that making the > programmers' UI look less ancient would go a long way to make them give a > second look). > Don't you feel a loss each time another person , who at first moments seem really intrigued by the powers & flexibility of smalltalk runs as a hell after seeing the Squeak? Or is there something extremely valuable in keeping it so alien to others, that we can't change it and be more inclusive, more friendly and more welcome to everyone? > Being an environment for professionals and learners alike has always been a > strong point of Squeak. There is no unresolvable tension there that I can > see. Right , this is not unresolvable. > For example, the Etoys team started 2 years ago to develop a product > that got shipped to 500 thousand users by now, soon it will be a million. > They did that with only a handful of developers working part-time. Sticking > to the base system version they started out with was the only option (as > everybody who ever did serious product development can relate to). Now that > the hot development phase is over, the changes can be folded back into > Squeak proper. > > I'm glad the Squeak community is made of individuals who care for different > aspects of the system. Together we are creating a truly unique computing > environment. And fortunately, there is a new home for those who cannot bear > their "professional system" being marred by crayons here and there. Have fun > with Pharo if that's all you ever wanted from Squeak. Seriously, enjoy it. > Just don't bother those who think living under the same roof with kids isn't > all that bad. > We can live under the same roof. And i'm all for it. Just don't turn every room in this house to be a child room. We need a room for guests, rest room, a working room, a garage room, and of course - a child room. > - Bert - > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. |
Re: [squeak-dev] Squeak vision
|
|
2009/7/1 Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]>:
> 2009/7/1 Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]>: >> On 01.07.2009, at 06:28, Igor Stasenko wrote: >> >>> 2009/7/1 Ramon Leon <[hidden email]>: >>>>> >>>>> Bert, are you serious? >>>>> >>>>> Enough with the children! It's been done and redone and overdone. The >>>>> past and the future confounded. Why can't we live the present living? >>>>> You're talking about something that might (or might not) produce >>>>> engineers in the next, say, 20 years? Smalltalk will be around 50 >>>>> years by then. I find it painful that our community wouldn't be a >>>>> little bit more practical, for a change.. >>>>> >>>>> Right here, right now. >>>>> >>>>> Ian. >>>>> >>>>> PS: I am so sorry... I don't even have spare children to furiously >>>>> train on Squeak... >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> http://mecenia.blogspot.com/ >>>> >>>> +10 >>>> >>>> Seriously, stop talking about kids, who cares, I'll be retired by the >>>> time they're useful. Programming languages are tools that are >>>> primarily used by and useful for adults, they should be aimed at >>>> adults. I want Smalltalk to be usable now, not at some unspecified >>>> time in some imaginary future where it takes over the world by getting >>>> kids before they've been introduced to other environments. It's pure >>>> fantasy to think this'll happen, it won't. This is the attitude that >>>> holds Squeak back and prevents anyone from taking it too seriously. >>>> This is why Pharo will continue to steal mind-share and Squeak will >>>> die. >> >> This is so short-sighted I shouldn't even respond. Most kids fortunately do >> not live on their own. They have parents and teachers. Some of those are or >> have connections to developers. We are already starting to see growing >> interest in Squeak from developers worldwide because of that. Right here, >> right now. You might notice Squeak is getting packaged into various Linux >> distributions now. You think that's fantasy? >> >>> +10. >>> Let us separate the domains: >>> 1. Squeak for developers who need a modern & sound smalltalk >>> environment which fullfills their needs and >>> 2. Squeak for teachers/children/endusers who will use a wonderfull >>> environment produced by software engineers. >>> >>> If you don't have 1st, you can't progress in 2nd, because obviously >>> developers do not like sitting in child room and pretend that they are >>> sitting in the lab. >> >> >> I came to Squeak and stuck around for more than 10 years now because it >> always felt like a project with a vision. A vision that goes way beyond the >> simple-minded "I want something like the other guys have just a little bit >> nicer". If Alan's group started with that theme 40 years ago we would not >> have Smalltalk now. >> >> Mind you, I never implied that work should stop to improve Squeak in the >> here-and-now (go back and read what I wrote). But for me every improvement >> fits into a larger context. >> > > I never implied that we should drop supporting an educational software > for squeak (eToys & friends). > Just tell me: who is currently maintains eToys in Squeak 3.10.2? > If there's no-one, then wouldn't it be better to cut it out and > integrate later as a separate module/package (whatever you think is > fits for it) by people who cares? > When i come to shop to buy a bread & taking it to the cash desk, is > there anyone yelling at me, that i'm also need to pay for a bicycle, > because bread is not selling as a separate product? > > Please understand me, i have nothing against eToys. But i treat eToys > as an application on Squeak platform, not as a core part of it. And i > thinking that it should play under a common rules as any other > applications do: keep it as separate package. > > Othewise, how many people next time will go to this shop for buying a bread? > >> Squeak is a versatile tool for everybody. I've seen professional developers >> get excited about it as much as elementary school kids, high-school >> students, and PhD candidates. It's just a simple fact that the more >> "conventional wisdom" people have acquired, the harder it gets for them to >> appreciate the beauty of Squeak (and I happily admit that making the >> programmers' UI look less ancient would go a long way to make them give a >> second look). >> > > Don't you feel a loss each time another person , who at first moments > seem really intrigued by the powers & flexibility of smalltalk runs as > a hell after seeing the Squeak? > Or is there something extremely valuable in keeping it so alien to > others, that we can't change it and be more inclusive, more friendly > and more welcome to everyone? > >> Being an environment for professionals and learners alike has always been a >> strong point of Squeak. There is no unresolvable tension there that I can >> see. > > Right , this is not unresolvable. > >> For example, the Etoys team started 2 years ago to develop a product >> that got shipped to 500 thousand users by now, soon it will be a million. >> They did that with only a handful of developers working part-time. Sticking >> to the base system version they started out with was the only option (as >> everybody who ever did serious product development can relate to). Now that >> the hot development phase is over, the changes can be folded back into >> Squeak proper. >> >> I'm glad the Squeak community is made of individuals who care for different >> aspects of the system. Together we are creating a truly unique computing >> environment. And fortunately, there is a new home for those who cannot bear >> their "professional system" being marred by crayons here and there. Have fun >> with Pharo if that's all you ever wanted from Squeak. Seriously, enjoy it. >> Just don't bother those who think living under the same roof with kids isn't >> all that bad. >> > > We can live under the same roof. And i'm all for it. Just don't turn > every room in this house to be a child room. > We need a room for guests, rest room, a working room, a garage room, > and of course - a child room. > > If doors are all locked, corridor long and crooked, and no one gets out of its own room, then it's not a house, it's a jail. Nicolas >> - Bert - >> > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. > > |
|
|
In reply to this post by Igor Stasenko
>> Mind you, I never implied that work should stop to improve Squeak in the
>> here-and-now (go back and read what I wrote). But for me every improvement >> fits into a larger context. >> > > I never implied that we should drop supporting an educational software > for squeak (eToys & friends). > Just tell me: who is currently maintains eToys in Squeak 3.10.2? > If there's no-one, then wouldn't it be better to cut it out and > integrate later as a separate module/package (whatever you think is > fits for it) by people who cares? > When i come to shop to buy a bread & taking it to the cash desk, is > there anyone yelling at me, that i'm also need to pay for a bicycle, > because bread is not selling as a separate product? > > Please understand me, i have nothing against eToys. But i treat eToys > as an application on Squeak platform, not as a core part of it. And i > thinking that it should play under a common rules as any other > applications do: keep it as separate package. Ditto, why is so hard for some to see that eToys isn't Squeak, it's an app build on Squeak? If eToys was a loadable/unloadable application, no one would have any problem with it whatsoever. >> For example, the Etoys team started 2 years ago to develop a product >> that got shipped to 500 thousand users by now, soon it will be a million. >> They did that with only a handful of developers working part-time. Sticking >> to the base system version they started out with was the only option (as >> everybody who ever did serious product development can relate to). Now that >> the hot development phase is over, the changes can be folded back into >> Squeak proper. It doesn't need to be in Squeak at all, any version. What it needs is to be able to be loaded into Squeak like any other application. There's just no justification for it being in the core image; none. > We can live under the same roof. And i'm all for it. Just don't turn > every room in this house to be a child room. > We need a room for guests, rest room, a working room, a garage room, > and of course - a child room. +10. Ramon Leon http://onsmalltalk.com |
|
|
2009/7/1 Ramon Leon <[hidden email]>:
>>> Mind you, I never implied that work should stop to improve Squeak in the >>> here-and-now (go back and read what I wrote). But for me every >>> improvement >>> fits into a larger context. >>> >> >> I never implied that we should drop supporting an educational software >> for squeak (eToys & friends). >> Just tell me: who is currently maintains eToys in Squeak 3.10.2? >> If there's no-one, then wouldn't it be better to cut it out and >> integrate later as a separate module/package (whatever you think is >> fits for it) by people who cares? >> When i come to shop to buy a bread & taking it to the cash desk, is >> there anyone yelling at me, that i'm also need to pay for a bicycle, >> because bread is not selling as a separate product? >> >> Please understand me, i have nothing against eToys. But i treat eToys >> as an application on Squeak platform, not as a core part of it. And i >> thinking that it should play under a common rules as any other >> applications do: keep it as separate package. > > Ditto, why is so hard for some to see that eToys isn't Squeak, it's an app > build on Squeak? If eToys was a loadable/unloadable application, no one > would have any problem with it whatsoever. > A few more words to support that: Isn't the part of Seaside success was that it is developed as a standalone application? Think, how hard it would be to port it on a different platform, if its was tightly integrated into particular Squeak image. And does it (being standalone) makes Seaside a less great/useful/usable thing than eToys because of that? Please note, i don't belong to Seaside camp and not trying to evangelize. My interest in Seaside is almost equal to interest in eToys. My true range of interests lying somewhere else :) >>> For example, the Etoys team started 2 years ago to develop a product >>> that got shipped to 500 thousand users by now, soon it will be a million. >>> They did that with only a handful of developers working part-time. >>> Sticking >>> to the base system version they started out with was the only option (as >>> everybody who ever did serious product development can relate to). Now >>> that >>> the hot development phase is over, the changes can be folded back into >>> Squeak proper. > > It doesn't need to be in Squeak at all, any version. What it needs is to be > able to be loaded into Squeak like any other application. There's just no > justification for it being in the core image; none. > >> We can live under the same roof. And i'm all for it. Just don't turn >> every room in this house to be a child room. >> We need a room for guests, rest room, a working room, a garage room, >> and of course - a child room. > > +10. > > Ramon Leon > http://onsmalltalk.com > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. |
«
Return to Squeak - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |