I am sharing Markuses hartred towards badly crafted code. But this is not a hostility towards Squeak. I love it :) There are parts which could be done better and cleaner, with more thought-out design. So, there is a big space for improvement, nothing more.
On 1 April 2010 12:45, Andreas Raab <[email protected]> wrote: > On 4/1/2010 1:06 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: >> >> So then I was wrong with this analysis... but on the big picture, it is >> true. And you know it. > > It was. In the past. But I don't live in the past. I live in the present. > And in the present, Squeak has moved on. We're past that. We have a great > system, a great community, a great contribution process. If you look at the > last eight months we've had more contributions than in the previous five > years together, both small and large. We have *serious* momentum. We have > Etoys and Croquet/Cobalt moving back to Squeak. We'll be having the *second* > release this year in three weeks we may even have a third release this year > if the momentum keeps up. > > In any case we're *way* past the issues you mention. Everyone who wants to > help Squeak is welcome to contribute[1]. That includes you and Stef. You > have standing invitations to join the Squeak core developers so if you have > any interest in Squeak left, you'll pick that invitation up and help make > Squeak better. At least that's how I judge if someone really loves Squeak - > not whether he says it but whether he *does* something to improve it. > > [1]http://squeakboard.wordpress.com/2009/07/02/a-new-community-development-model/ > > Cheers, > - Andreas > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
