Smalltalk › Squeak › Squeak - Dev

[squeak-dev] what is holding back Smalltalk?

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

85 messages Options

12345

Klaus D. Witzel

[squeak-dev] Re: Nothing much [was: what is holding back Smalltalk?]

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:55:24 +0100, Bert Freudenberg wrote:

> Where did you hear that?

Yes, interesting question :)

FWIW in 2006 I found that Google advertises that using their own system

- http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=smalltalk&gl=US

It' still there, refresh you browser until you can see one of their
Smalltalk ads like this one

Smalltalk at Google?
Dig SmallTalk & object oriented
design? Get a Java XP job at Google
www.google.com/jobs/

/Klaus

> - Bert -
>
> On 21.11.2008, at 10:47, Steven W Riggins wrote:
>
>> I heard that google hired developers with deep Smalltalk
>> experience........
>>
>> On Nov 21, 2008, at 12:28 AM, Klaus D. Witzel wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 00:02:47 +0100, Mark Volkmann <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I don't have a lot of experience with Smalltalk yet, but I really
>>>> love what I've seen so far.
>>>>
>>>> I'm curious what experienced Smalltalkers see as some of the reasons
>>>> why it doesn't attract more attention.
>>>
>>> Me thinks that the Smalltalk community is healthy and vibrant--it is
>>> "just" a community form one would not expect for Ruby or Python or
>>> Perl, etc. To get impression of my impression take a look at what
>>> *actually* happened during the *recent* months:
>>>
>>> - Exupery (native x86 methods) powers Huemul
>>> - Seaside (web++ framework++) powers GLASS
>>> - Hydra (multiple parallel .images) powers Croquet .images
>>> - Google hires developers with deep Smalltalk experience
>>> - two more gods to be worshipped in the VM temple ;)
>>> - Squeak powers NewSpeak
>>> - new book Squeak by Example (creative commons license)
>>> - port of OpenDBX to Squeak (still not on windoze)
>>> - port of Squeak/VM to "another" smartphone platform ;)
>>> - DrGeo made it to the XO (OLPC)
>>> - fresh new subcommunity Pharo
>>> - attempt? to port Moose (world class sw analysis) to Squeak
>>> - Google hires developers with deep Smalltalk experience
>>> - Squeak web site migrated to/powered by Aida/Web Squeak
>>> - 4 (four) projects run through 2008's Goggle Summer of Code
>>> - the "everybody needs it" Safara from GSoC as yet not in mainstream
>>> - the "everybody needs it" Squeak GTK from GSoC as yet not in
>>> mainstream
>>> - IBM builds Smalltalk IDE inside Eclipse
>>> - Google hires developers with deep Smalltalk experience
>>> - ESUG 2008 conference draws more attendands than ever
>>>
>>> That list is of course incomplete, for example one wants to add the
>>> many noobs who joined #squeak and the beginners mailing list.
>>>
>>> I do not think that *soo* much is holding back Smalltalk ;)
>>>
>>> /Klaus

Bert Freudenberg

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: Nothing much [was: what is holding back Smalltalk?]

On 21.11.2008, at 11:30, Klaus D. Witzel wrote:

> On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:55:24 +0100, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>
>> Where did you hear that?
>
> Yes, interesting question :)
>
> FWIW in 2006 I found that Google advertises that using their own
> system
>
> - http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=smalltalk&gl=US
>
> It' still there, refresh you browser until you can see one of their
> Smalltalk ads like this one
>
> Smalltalk at Google?
> Dig SmallTalk & object oriented
> design? Get a Java XP job at Google
> www.google.com/jobs/

Ah great.

Heh, interestingly "One Laptop per Child" is one of the sponsored ads
when you google for "Smalltalk" but not for "Python".

- Bert -

Ryan Mitchley

Re: [squeak-dev] what is holding back Smalltalk?

In reply to this post by Mark Volkmann

I think, partially, Smalltalk has never reached a kind of critical mass to attract widespread attention from non CS geeks.

Part of the problem is also the slight lack of easy deployability, as already mentioned. However, I think the seeds are already sown, e.g. for browser accessed-apps that can be dynamically tinkered with.

Imagine a Croquet world accessed through today's web browser where everything is editable in Smalltalk... I'm sure that would be something of a killer app. I think the Second Life etc models don't have nearly as clean or open an architecture to rival it.

The other problem is that Squeak has been behind the curve (probably because of available resources!) to interface with "hot" topics e.g. 3D rendering, video, databases. There have usually been more mature and readily available libraries in less elegant languages.

I think the whole "reinvention of computing" effort is ripe for fruition, though - particularly as smaller, cheaper mobile devices become ubiquitous. Smalltalk could easily exploit it's agility in these areas, and I think this is indeed happening. We need a Smalltalk phone now, dammit! It would only be a matter of time before the brighter kids are hacking in Smalltalk, and then the world is set for a revolution.

Ryan

Klaus D. Witzel

[squeak-dev] Re: Nothing much [was: what is holding back Smalltalk?]

In reply to this post by Bert Freudenberg

On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 11:43:07 +0100, Bert Freudenberg wrote:

>
> On 21.11.2008, at 11:30, Klaus D. Witzel wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 21 Nov 2008 10:55:24 +0100, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
>>
>>> Where did you hear that?
>>
>> Yes, interesting question :)
>>
>> FWIW in 2006 I found that Google advertises that using their own system
>>
>> - http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=smalltalk&gl=US
>>
>> It' still there, refresh you browser until you can see one of their
>> Smalltalk ads like this one
>>
>> Smalltalk at Google?
>> Dig SmallTalk & object oriented
>> design? Get a Java XP job at Google
>> www.google.com/jobs/
>
>
> Ah great.
>
> Heh, interestingly "One Laptop per Child" is one of the sponsored ads
> when you google for "Smalltalk" but not for "Python".

Yes, this is quite tricky with the AdWords system. I stumbled upon
Google's Smalltalk ad when I attempted to donate some money for
advertising the Squeak Smalltalk keywords with the AdWords system.

Unfortunately I had to give up coming into the ranks when "suddenly"
"somebody" put in bids for the Smalltalk keyword with a US$ 4
price-per-click tag on them (reminds me to check the current bids once in
a while).

I can only speculate that price tag has something to do with what you
observed for Python+OLPC.

/Klaus

> - Bert -
>

CdAB63

Re: [squeak-dev] what is holding back Smalltalk?

In reply to this post by Alan Grimes-2

Alan Grimes escreveu:

For me the biggest issue has been trying to run my code from outside
Squeak. This includes running Squeak headless to do something
script-like and configuring a GUI application to run in a way that
doesn't require the user to know they are running Squeak. Both of these
are supposedly possible, but very difficult to get right.


1. The VM, it's weak, no multithreading, few IO options.

2. The restriction to image based smalltalk instead of the ability to
run discreet programs...

Image based smalltalk is awesome but it makes it difficult to interface
smalltalk code with external systems.

The shortcomings about the squeak VM can be easily surpassed. Same thing about the "image" issue.

IMHO what holds Smalltalk (and squeak in particular) is lack of investment ($$$) in order to provide the things that "commercial users" (aka "regular developers/users") imagine/request as desirable (like "canonic" documentation, "canonic" books like "Smalltalk for dummies" (LOL) or "coreSmalltalk" or "Smalltalk Foundation Classes", better default options for the interfaces).

Besides these "small things" there are some important issues: there are several flavors of smalltalk and they're not compatible to each other. It seems that in the "open/free world" squeak will take the lead and perhaps it is good news. Anyways, today we have only VW to be seriously considered in the "commercial world" (since Dolphin is not multi-platform and was "half abandoned" by its developers and other smalltalks are both non portable and little known) and squeak and VW VMs are not compatible (no instant or even easy port from squeak to VW).

It is not possible to imagine the success of anything that is not accepted by the non-academic community. Currently most of the non-academic community in the World has little more than high-school degree, little or no fluency in English and earn something like US$1.000,00/month (or less) for a journey of at least 40hours/week (and lots of non payed over-time). So I do think that the two previous paragraphs are relevant aspects to the question of "what is holding back smalltalk?"

signature.asc (267 bytes) Download Attachment

Mariano Martinez Peck

Re: [squeak-dev] what is holding back Smalltalk?

I am very newbie with smalltalk, but I have some thoughts about this question.

- Markting (someone has already say it)
- Lack of investment (someone has already say it)
- Smalltalk is simple. And, as It says a friend of mine, simplest things doesn't sell. It might be complex. Complex things are the most sold.
- Companies needs to spend many and spent their budgets
- Databases support. Squeak for example, how can be used in many enterprise projects if there is only driver for mysql and postgres ? and Glorp only with postgres... We did a survey and they are just the 20% of the market (we need support for oracle, mssql, and so on.). Because of this, we are working in SqueakDBX.
- IDE. It has a lot of good things, but also a lot of limitations. I am very use to use Eclipse. And sometime to miss some features about it.
- There is no company (in squeak) behind it. Managers, owners, directors, and so on, many times need this. They need it in order to have someone to blame in case of problems.

cheers,

Mariano

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 10:26 AM, Casimiro de Almeida Barreto <[hidden email]> wrote:

Alan Grimes escreveu:
For me the biggest issue has been trying to run my code from outside
Squeak. This includes running Squeak headless to do something
script-like and configuring a GUI application to run in a way that
doesn't require the user to know they are running Squeak. Both of these
are supposedly possible, but very difficult to get right.
    
1. The VM, it's weak, no multithreading, few IO options.

2. The restriction to image based smalltalk instead of the ability to
run discreet programs...

Image based smalltalk is awesome but it makes it difficult to interface
smalltalk code with external systems.

  
The shortcomings about the squeak VM can be easily surpassed. Same thing about the "image" issue.

IMHO what holds Smalltalk (and squeak in particular) is lack of investment ($$$) in order to provide the things that "commercial users" (aka "regular developers/users") imagine/request as desirable (like "canonic" documentation, "canonic" books like "Smalltalk for dummies" (LOL) or "coreSmalltalk" or "Smalltalk Foundation Classes", better default options for the interfaces).

Besides these "small things" there are some important issues: there are several flavors of smalltalk and they're not compatible to each other. It seems that in the "open/free world" squeak will take the lead and perhaps it is good news. Anyways, today we have only VW to be seriously considered in the "commercial world" (since Dolphin is not multi-platform and was "half abandoned" by its developers and other smalltalks are both non portable and little known) and squeak and VW VMs are not compatible (no instant or even easy port from squeak to VW).

It is not possible to imagine the success of anything that is not accepted by the non-academic community. Currently most of the non-academic community in the World has little more than high-school degree, little or no fluency in English and earn something like US$1.000,00/month (or less) for a journey of at least 40hours/week (and lots of non payed over-time). So I do think that the two previous paragraphs are relevant aspects to the question of "what is holding back smalltalk?"

Paolo Bonzini-2

[squeak-dev] Re: what is holding back Smalltalk?

In reply to this post by Randal L. Schwartz

Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>>>>>> "nico" == nico <[hidden email]> writes:
>
> nico> You may also want to try GNU Smalltalk (http://smalltalk.gnu.org).
> nico> I just started using it for my scripting tasks, and so far I think it a
> nico> lot better than Python or Ruby.
>
> But beware of looking at any of its source code if you ever think you
> might be contibuting to the Squeak core. See my discussion at
> http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/library/post/beware-gnu-smalltalk-if-you-work-on-squeak.html

Blah, blah, blah.

Paolo

Steven W Riggins

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: what is holding back Smalltalk?

And these sorts of responses are what is wrong with the smalltalk
community :)

On Nov 21, 2008, at 4:54 AM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:

> Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>>>>>>> "nico" == nico <[hidden email]> writes:
>>
>> nico> You may also want to try GNU Smalltalk (http://smalltalk.gnu.org
>> ).
>> nico> I just started using it for my scripting tasks, and so far I
>> think it a
>> nico> lot better than Python or Ruby.
>>
>> But beware of looking at any of its source code if you ever think you
>> might be contibuting to the Squeak core. See my discussion at
>> http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/library/post/beware-gnu-smalltalk-if-you-work-on-squeak.html
>
> Blah, blah, blah.
>
> Paolo
>

Randal L. Schwartz

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: what is holding back Smalltalk?

I presume by "these sorts of responses" you mean Paolo's response to me. My
response is driven by my responsibility as being an elected member of the
leadership team, to ensure that Squeak 4.0 will have a completely clean
license. We worked very hard over the last few years to track down every
contribution to squeak since its beginning, obtaining legal documents updating
the license, and it would be a shame if a mistakenly derived work from GNU
Smalltalk were to taint the distribution once again.

I'm serious about this, and will continue to bring it up in every appropriate
context. I wish this weren't the case: I pleaded with Paolo to dual license
the Smalltalk code in GNU Smalltalk under the MIT license so that people can
freely examine the implementation and use as is or derive from it to
contribute to the squeak project. So far, these requests have been declined,
albeit understandably.
--
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

Karl Ramberg

Re: [squeak-dev] what is holding back Smalltalk?

In reply to this post by Igor Stasenko

Igor Stasenko wrote:

> I think that one of the major drawbacks of smalltalk is its 80's
> implementation which offers 0 (zero) modularity.
> A smalltalk image is a universe, which contains everything. It can't
> be split on parts, you can't manage these parts to load/unload on
> demand. Everything is tightly welded together and sometimes, even if
> you want to get rid of some stuff - its very hard to do. Its like a
> painting ink - once you stepped into it once - you start leaving
> footprints everywhere.
> Its very good from one side, but not always: for a people working in
> contaminated areas, they need to pass a clean-up procedures to reduce
> the risk of bringing unwanted stuff into that environment.
> In smalltalk there is no such contaminated areas - you free to go
> everywhere and leave your footprints. Who cares? :)
> This is the problem: if people don't have a discipline and leaving
> stuff everywhere they think it good to be, then at the end we got a
> complete mess, no structure, no organization, just a half-working
> pieces spreaded across many places.
>
> Also, even if organized well, projects can't grow bigger than certain
> amount, and at some point they become unmanageable, simply because no
> single man can hold so much information in his head to understand it
> and make some progress with it.
> At some point, you have to split your project on separate parts and
> delegate your work to other people. And also, make sure that these
> parts can evolve more or less independently.
> This is where fun begins: a smalltalk inherent implementation lacks
> modularity and offers nothing to you how to break things apart without
> losing consistency.
> Instead, it makes you addict in using globals everywhere and be
> careless about future :)
>
> Another analogue: kids playing with lego puzzle. One kid puts one
> piece on top of another, then second puts some more pieces on top of
> it, and so on, then another kid came and realizes that if he replace
> the piece inside a construction it would be much more elegant. But at
> first attempt when he tries that, he breaks the whole construction :)
>
> I hoping this will change in near future. Smalltalk syntax is the
> simplest and most powerful syntax i met.
>
>
>
>

+ 1

Karl

Janko Mivšek

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: what is holding back Smalltalk?

In reply to this post by Randal L. Schwartz

Hi Randal,

Please excuse me but I need to support Paolo here. In sense that he
doesn't stick blindfuly to those license issues while you do. Again and
again. Please stop dividing Smalltalk world with such actions. Squeak
is/will be MIT, GNU Smalltalk is LGPL. OK, that is, don't expose your
anti-whatever license bias again and again. For the Smalltalk as a whole
sake. Please.

Janko

Randal L. Schwartz wrote:

> I presume by "these sorts of responses" you mean Paolo's response to me. My
> response is driven by my responsibility as being an elected member of the
> leadership team, to ensure that Squeak 4.0 will have a completely clean
> license. We worked very hard over the last few years to track down every
> contribution to squeak since its beginning, obtaining legal documents updating
> the license, and it would be a shame if a mistakenly derived work from GNU
> Smalltalk were to taint the distribution once again.
>
> I'm serious about this, and will continue to bring it up in every appropriate
> context. I wish this weren't the case: I pleaded with Paolo to dual license
> the Smalltalk code in GNU Smalltalk under the MIT license so that people can
> freely examine the implementation and use as is or derive from it to
> contribute to the squeak project. So far, these requests have been declined,
> albeit understandably.

--
Janko Mivšek
AIDA/Web
Smalltalk Web Application Server
http://www.aidaweb.si

CdAB63

Re: [squeak-dev] what is holding back Smalltalk?

In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck

Mariano Martinez Peck escreveu:

I am very newbie with smalltalk, but I have some thoughts about this question.

- Markting (someone has already say it)
- Lack of investment (someone has already say it)
- Smalltalk is simple. And, as It says a friend of mine, simplest things doesn't sell. It might be complex. Complex things are the most sold.

Interesting that I've got other "arguments" against the adoption of smalltalk: "strange" (which can be translated as: "oh my God, where's main(), where's int myDummySomething(...)...) and "confuse" (meaning: where the hell I am supposed to look for references on classes and methods outside the ClassBrowser??? I need some written references for God sake...).

- Companies needs to spend many and spent their budgets

Not that but managers are just cautious to use tools that don't have "certified developers/users". Interesting enough, Linux ascended the sales ranks (at least around here) when companies started to "certify" developers. Not to mention that they started to employ the "black vali$e $ale$people" to counter the other vendors of "Janela$/Ventana$" OS...

- Databases support. Squeak for example, how can be used in many enterprise projects if there is only driver for mysql and postgres ? and Glorp only with postgres... We did a survey and they are just the 20% of the market (we need support for oracle, mssql, and so on.). Because of this, we are working in SqueakDBX.
- IDE. It has a lot of good things, but also a lot of limitations. I am very use to use Eclipse. And sometime to miss some features about it.

That's an interesting point because this can lead to a UI model closer to Java: instead of having a dedicated "world", being able to open windows in the native environment (Windows, X-Window, OS-X). Anyways, GNU smalltalk can do that.

- There is no company (in squeak) behind it. Managers, owners, directors, and so on, many times need this. They need it in order to have someone to blame in case of problems.

But there is a foundation that formerly had support from Apple. A big task is to enhance the support of private ventures to the Squeak Foundation.

cheers,

Mariano

signature.asc (267 bytes) Download Attachment

Emilio Oca

RE: [squeak-dev] what is holding back Smalltalk?

In reply to this post by CdAB63

> -----Mensaje original-----
> David Mitchell escreveu:
> Most of the things that make Smalltalk great (what makes Smalltalk
> Smalltalk) are the things that hold it back for a lot of people.
>
> If you want a more Unixy, scripty, Smalltalkish thing with syntax
> blended C and Perl that you can hack with a text editor, try Ruby.
>
> If you want objects all the time with a crazy amount of integration in
> the tools and little attempt at conforming to outside ideas, Smalltalk
> is your game.
>
>
>
> Some things that hold back smalltalk:
>
> 1 .... Everybody
> knows that with current technology (JVM) it is not possible to build
> large intensive Java applications (just study how the garbage
> collection works... what happens when you have to handle large data...).
> ....

Careful, that's not true. With trained guys it surely can be accomplished.
The small team I belong to it's an example of that.
Of course it is still easier with smalltalk. And I think previous Smalltak
training was key part of our success.
To think that everything related to java is just trash is mistaken and
doesn't help.

Cheers.

Emilio

Emilio Oca

RE: [squeak-dev] what is holding back Smalltalk?

In reply to this post by Michael van der Gulik-2

> -----Mensaje original-----
> En nombre de Michael van der Gulik
>
> On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Mark Volkmann <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I don't have a lot of experience with Smalltalk yet, but I really
> love what I've seen so far.
>
> I'm curious what experienced Smalltalkers see as some of the reasons
> why it doesn't attract more attention. I understand the issues with
> Smalltalk in the past related to license costs and performance, but
> those have been addressed now. Have you tried to convince someone to
> consider Smalltalk and failed to convince them?Why do you think they
> rejected it? What improvements could be made to current Smalltalk
> environments, especially Squeak, that might sway them?
>
> I'd like to ask how Ruby on Rails got so popular, and what makes it

different from Squeak?
>
> Gulik.

Something to consider is that Ruby enthusiast are happy to say aloud that
they are using Ruby.
But big players keep under tight secret what they consider a key advantage
over it's competitors. Even making it's vendors sing not to tell anybody.
We (me and my smalltalk friends developers) always suspected that. Now I
know.
I you've been at Smalltalks 2008 (Argentina), You now know too ;)

Cheers.

Emilio

Danie Roux-3

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: what is holding back Smalltalk?

In reply to this post by Janko Mivšek

Janko,

Please excuse me, I need to support Randal here.

On Fri, Nov 21, 2008 at 15:50, Janko Mivšek <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi Randal,
>
> Please excuse me but I need to support Paolo here. In sense that he doesn't
> stick blindfuly to those license issues while you do.

Randal is not sticking "blindly" to any license issue. His email said:

"But beware of looking at any of its source code if you ever think you
might be contibuting to the Squeak core."

That is a real and valid concern. His blog entry explains it clearly as well.

> Please stop dividing Smalltalk world with such actions. Squeak is/will be
> MIT, GNU Smalltalk is LGPL.

One could argue that the license divide is the cause of the divide.

Who would not want Generators in Squeak? It is solely because of the
license concern that we can not use the good parts of GNU Smalltalk.

--
Danie Roux *shuffle* Adore Unix - http://danieroux.com

CdAB63

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: what is holding back Smalltalk?

In reply to this post by Randal L. Schwartz

Randal L. Schwartz escreveu:

Hello Randall,

Sorry if this question bother you, but I'm not expert in legal issues
and I'm used to work with GPL and LGPL software.

I understand that Squeak was first issued under Apple licensing system.
Then, last year it was decided to migrate everything to the MIT license.
But for people not acquainted with licensing systems, the differences
may not clear. What are the incompatibilities between MIT licenses and
GPL/LGPL licenses?

Best regards,

Casimiro

signature.asc (267 bytes) Download Attachment

Bert Freudenberg

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: what is holding back Smalltalk?

In reply to this post by Janko Mivšek

On 21.11.2008, at 14:50, Janko Mivšek wrote:

> Hi Randal,
>
> Please excuse me but I need to support Paolo here. In sense that he
> doesn't stick blindfuly to those license issues while you do. Again
> and again. Please stop dividing Smalltalk world with such actions.
> Squeak is/will be MIT, GNU Smalltalk is LGPL. OK, that is, don't
> expose your anti-whatever license bias again and again. For the
> Smalltalk as a whole sake. Please.

I understand your sentiment - I used to think the same about licenses.
But this is exactly the kind of attitude that got us into the whole
messy situation with licenses.

This was not an attack against Paolo personally or even against GNU in
general - it's just that we have to be cautious where code comes from
because it's easy to accidentally get infectiously-licensed code in,
but it's much harder to remove later.

If there went even a single LGPL method into a release, the whole of
Squeak would have to become GNU licensed. Read the LGPL if you don't
believe this.

The only way around this is if the author of the LGPL code in question
would explicitly allow that code to be used under the MIT license.

- Bert -

Randal L. Schwartz

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: what is holding back Smalltalk?

In reply to this post by Janko Mivšek

>>>>> "Janko" == Janko Mivšek <[hidden email]> writes:

Janko> Please excuse me but I need to support Paolo here. In sense that he
Janko> doesn't stick blindfuly to those license issues while you do. Again and
Janko> again. Please stop dividing Smalltalk world with such actions. Squeak
Janko> is/will be MIT, GNU Smalltalk is LGPL. OK, that is, don't expose your
Janko> anti-whatever license bias again and again. For the Smalltalk as a
Janko> whole sake. Please.

Please stop mischaracterising this as a license "bias" or telling me to not
perform my duty to ensure a clean license for Squeak. I truly do not want
disharmony on this issue. But the lawyers (especially for the FSF) would
differ on that, and that would be a serious mess. Best to do the right thing
now, and not have to face a meltdown later.

The Squeak community chose Apache2. The GST authors chose GPL/LGPL. I
support both of those choices completely. But it means that while code could
freely flow from Squeak to GST, the opposite is *an unknown needless risk*.
That's all i've ever argued on this. And any comment to the contrary deserves
my clarification again.

--
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

Bert Freudenberg

Re: [squeak-dev] Re: what is holding back Smalltalk?

In reply to this post by CdAB63

On 21.11.2008, at 15:02, Casimiro de Almeida Barreto wrote:

> Randal L. Schwartz escreveu:
>> I presume by "these sorts of responses" you mean Paolo's response
>> to me. My
>> response is driven by my responsibility as being an elected member
>> of the
>> leadership team, to ensure that Squeak 4.0 will have a completely
>> clean
>> license. We worked very hard over the last few years to track down
>> every
>> contribution to squeak since its beginning, obtaining legal
>> documents updating
>> the license, and it would be a shame if a mistakenly derived work
>> from GNU
>> Smalltalk were to taint the distribution once again.
>>
>> I'm serious about this, and will continue to bring it up in every
>> appropriate
>> context. I wish this weren't the case: I pleaded with Paolo to dual
>> license
>> the Smalltalk code in GNU Smalltalk under the MIT license so that
>> people can
>> freely examine the implementation and use as is or derive from it to
>> contribute to the squeak project. So far, these requests have been
>> declined,
>> albeit understandably.
>>
> Hello Randall,
>
> Sorry if this question bother you, but I'm not expert in legal issues
> and I'm used to work with GPL and LGPL software.
>
> I understand that Squeak was first issued under Apple licensing
> system.
> Then, last year it was decided to migrate everything to the MIT
> license.
> But for people not acquainted with licensing systems, the differences
> may not clear. What are the incompatibilities between MIT licenses and
> GPL/LGPL licenses?

There is no incompatibility between MIT and GPL (although there is
between Apache and GPL, and parts of Squeak are still under ASL 2.0).

But GPL is viral (and LGPL too if you rip out code and not just link
to it) so it infects other code used together with the GPLed code. We
do not want Squeak to become GPL licensed so we need to be careful
what code to let in.

- Bert -

CdAB63

Re: [squeak-dev] what is holding back Smalltalk?

In reply to this post by Emilio Oca

Emilio Oca escreveu:

>
> Careful, that's not true. With trained guys it surely can be accomplished.
> The small team I belong to it's an example of that.
> Of course it is still easier with smalltalk. And I think previous Smalltak
> training was key part of our success.
> To think that everything related to java is just trash is mistaken and
> doesn't help.
>
> Cheers.
>
> Emilio
>
>
>
>

But at what cost????

Java is more suited for small applications and I guess that Oracle
people got it right when they started to migrate from old tools to Java
in order to have better UI development. But when you have to handle
large amounts of data and extremely dynamic objects and things like that
Java performance drops to the point that it is better to use C++ or even
C...

Interesting enough, there are lots of re-engineering initiatives for the
Java VM. Up to the moment nobody was able to create a VM that lessens
the troubles with the garbage collection system and other performance
related topics.

Anyways, this list is to discuss development under squeak... I think in
future I'll leave Java issues to Java lists...

signature.asc (267 bytes) Download Attachment

12345