February 2014 - Esug-list - lists.esug.org

Pharo Weekly

by Stéphane Ducasse

Hi guys I started a blog about pharo for those that do not want to read 1000 mails to get information :) http://pharoweekly.wordpress.com/ Spread the word Stef

Feb. 10, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] [gsoc-mentors] The truth on GSOC, ESUG and bad attitude

by Luc Fabresse

Hi Janko, I do not have all numbers at hand now but in 2013 there were 4 extra-GSOC but we paid only 3 because one student gave up (Jean-Baptiste Beuzelin). So yes you are probably right that it remains money if we integrate last year BUT we were willing to spend it. Luc 2014-02-09 Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek(a)eranova.si>: > Dear all, > > First to Luc: from your numbers it is clear that you are not to be > blamed on anything, because you were obviously misinformed and misguided. > > Facts namely are: > > 1. GSoC mentors decided to pay extra stipendiums 3000 USD [1] while > ESUG without approval paid 2000 more, 5000 USD, without any report > back to GSoC mentors, > > 2. GSoC mentors decided to add past GSoC2012 amount to the pool for > paying extra projects [2][3]. > > Calculation (without the Summit expenses) therefore is: > > Income: GSoC 2012 13x 500 = 6.500 USD > GSoC 2013 13x 500 = 6.500 USD > ------------------------------ > 13.000 USD > > Expenses: > Extra stipendiums: 3x 3.000 = 9.000 USD > > Difference: + 4.000 USD > > If ESUG would follow the decisions of GSoC mentors it wouldn't loose any > money but gain 4.000 USD. > > Those that misinformed and misguided you needs therefore to apologize to > you Luc, to the GSoC mentors and to me as admin! > > Janko > > [1] > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/Yrlj8dIgGPg > [2] > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/WwnxpkXzAB8 > [3] > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/tR44jdPT5Hw > > > Dne 09. 02. 2014 17:26, piše Luc Fabresse: > > Hi all, > > > > ------------ > > FACTS > > > > As you all know, I am the ESUG treasurer. > > So please find the numbers attached for the ESUG support of GSOC > > projects in 2013. > > > > ESUG sponsored 3 "extra-GSOC" meaning extra slots not accepted by Google. > > In the file it is: Alejandro Infante, Pablo Estefo and Benjamin Arezki. > > > > All in all we paid: > > - 3695EUR (~5000USD at that time i.e. same cost as a regular GSOC) each > > projects > > - Serge trip to Mentor summit > > > > And we received 5552EUR from Google > > > > so yes we lost ~6582EUR > > That is easy 13*500 USD would only cover 1 plain extra-Gsoc and we > > sponsorized 3. > > > > I also think that it is important to send someone to the GSoc mentor > > summit because it participates to the fact that Google recognizes ESUG > > ang gives slots the next year. > > > > It is alos important to note dates. > > ESUG paid first and then has been refund by Google. > > It would not be possible to do it without ESUG. > > > > ------------ > > FROM HERE, MY POINT OF VIEW ON THIS STORY: > > > > As some of you know, I doing the ESUG treasury stuff on my *own* time > > and it takes a lot! > > I am doing it because I strongly believe that Smalltalk (all falvors!) > > is a really great language that should be more widespread. > > > > I also completely open to discussions. > > The ESUG board can also explain its actions and even money status. > > I can do errors too. > > So if Janko wants some details on GSOC related money, JUST ASK! > > > > I cannot admit that: > > > > - Janko wrote about some money accusation. This is directly directed > > against the treasurer so me. > > And honestly, just reading again that I am biased and that I hide or > > steal money make me think that I should better quit. > > > > - Janko asked for apologies! what is that? even if I would have done a > > mistake (and ESUG did not loose money), YOU STILL MUST THANK ME for > > DOING THIS BORING TASK! and then I can correct mistakes if any > > > > - People wants an answer fast, this conversation started yesterday and I > > am spending my week-end with my kids > > > > > > I am really fed up with this kind of attitude. > > Stop accuse, better ask, discuss and we will solve the problems together > > if any. > > But I think it will never happen... > > > > #Luc > > The disgusted Treasurer of ESUG who will finish his week-end in bad mood > > > > > -- > Janko Mivšek > Smalltalk GSoC Admin Team >

Feb. 10, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] The truth on GSOC, ESUG and bad attitude

by Richard Sargent

I for one am grateful to Luc, Stéphane, and the rest of the ESUG volunteers for all the work they do. And I am grateful to the many people who are making Pharo the active free Smalltalk it is. I think Luc's advice "Stop accuse, better ask, discuss and we will solve the problems together if any" is good advice. I would offer one small bit of advice, too. The communication on this mailing list is predominantly in ENglish (for which I am also grateful!). There are many people posting on it whose first language is not English. There will certainly be poorly phrased statements and miscommunications, so it is especially important that people have discussions before posting things to the list for all to see. _____ From: Esug-list [mailto:esug-list-bounces@lists.esug.org] On Behalf Of Luc Fabresse Sent: February 9, 2014 08:27 To: Janko Mivšek; ESUG Mailing list; smalltalk-gsoc-mentors(a)googlegroups.com Cc: pharo-users; Pharo Development List; The general-purpose Squeak developers list Subject: [Esug-list] The truth on GSOC, ESUG and bad attitude Hi all, ------------ FACTS As you all know, I am the ESUG treasurer. So please find the numbers attached for the ESUG support of GSOC projects in 2013. ESUG sponsored 3 "extra-GSOC" meaning extra slots not accepted by Google. In the file it is: Alejandro Infante, Pablo Estefo and Benjamin Arezki. All in all we paid: - 3695EUR (~5000USD at that time i.e. same cost as a regular GSOC) each projects - Serge trip to Mentor summit And we received 5552EUR from Google so yes we lost ~6582EUR That is easy 13*500 USD would only cover 1 plain extra-Gsoc and we sponsorized 3. I also think that it is important to send someone to the GSoc mentor summit because it participates to the fact that Google recognizes ESUG ang gives slots the next year. It is alos important to note dates. ESUG paid first and then has been refund by Google. It would not be possible to do it without ESUG. ------------ FROM HERE, MY POINT OF VIEW ON THIS STORY: As some of you know, I doing the ESUG treasury stuff on my *own* time and it takes a lot! I am doing it because I strongly believe that Smalltalk (all falvors!) is a really great language that should be more widespread. I also completely open to discussions. The ESUG board can also explain its actions and even money status. I can do errors too. So if Janko wants some details on GSOC related money, JUST ASK! I cannot admit that: - Janko wrote about some money accusation. This is directly directed against the treasurer so me. And honestly, just reading again that I am biased and that I hide or steal money make me think that I should better quit. - Janko asked for apologies! what is that? even if I would have done a mistake (and ESUG did not loose money), YOU STILL MUST THANK ME for DOING THIS BORING TASK! and then I can correct mistakes if any - People wants an answer fast, this conversation started yesterday and I am spending my week-end with my kids I am really fed up with this kind of attitude. Stop accuse, better ask, discuss and we will solve the problems together if any. But I think it will never happen... #Luc The disgusted Treasurer of ESUG who will finish his week-end in bad mood

Feb. 9, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] [gsoc-mentors] The truth on GSOC, ESUG and bad attitude

by Janko Mivšek

Dear all, First to Luc: from your numbers it is clear that you are not to be blamed on anything, because you were obviously misinformed and misguided. Facts namely are: 1. GSoC mentors decided to pay extra stipendiums 3000 USD [1] while ESUG without approval paid 2000 more, 5000 USD, without any report back to GSoC mentors, 2. GSoC mentors decided to add past GSoC2012 amount to the pool for paying extra projects [2][3]. Calculation (without the Summit expenses) therefore is: Income: GSoC 2012 13x 500 = 6.500 USD GSoC 2013 13x 500 = 6.500 USD ------------------------------ 13.000 USD Expenses: Extra stipendiums: 3x 3.000 = 9.000 USD Difference: + 4.000 USD If ESUG would follow the decisions of GSoC mentors it wouldn't loose any money but gain 4.000 USD. Those that misinformed and misguided you needs therefore to apologize to you Luc, to the GSoC mentors and to me as admin! Janko [1] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/Yrlj8dIgGPg [2] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/WwnxpkXzAB8 [3] https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/tR44jdPT5Hw Dne 09. 02. 2014 17:26, piše Luc Fabresse: > Hi all, > > ------------ > FACTS > > As you all know, I am the ESUG treasurer. > So please find the numbers attached for the ESUG support of GSOC > projects in 2013. > > ESUG sponsored 3 "extra-GSOC" meaning extra slots not accepted by Google. > In the file it is: Alejandro Infante, Pablo Estefo and Benjamin Arezki. > > All in all we paid: > - 3695EUR (~5000USD at that time i.e. same cost as a regular GSOC) each > projects > - Serge trip to Mentor summit > > And we received 5552EUR from Google > > so yes we lost ~6582EUR > That is easy 13*500 USD would only cover 1 plain extra-Gsoc and we > sponsorized 3. > > I also think that it is important to send someone to the GSoc mentor > summit because it participates to the fact that Google recognizes ESUG > ang gives slots the next year. > > It is alos important to note dates. > ESUG paid first and then has been refund by Google. > It would not be possible to do it without ESUG. > > ------------ > FROM HERE, MY POINT OF VIEW ON THIS STORY: > > As some of you know, I doing the ESUG treasury stuff on my *own* time > and it takes a lot! > I am doing it because I strongly believe that Smalltalk (all falvors!) > is a really great language that should be more widespread. > > I also completely open to discussions. > The ESUG board can also explain its actions and even money status. > I can do errors too. > So if Janko wants some details on GSOC related money, JUST ASK! > > I cannot admit that: > > - Janko wrote about some money accusation. This is directly directed > against the treasurer so me. > And honestly, just reading again that I am biased and that I hide or > steal money make me think that I should better quit. > > - Janko asked for apologies! what is that? even if I would have done a > mistake (and ESUG did not loose money), YOU STILL MUST THANK ME for > DOING THIS BORING TASK! and then I can correct mistakes if any > > - People wants an answer fast, this conversation started yesterday and I > am spending my week-end with my kids > > > I am really fed up with this kind of attitude. > Stop accuse, better ask, discuss and we will solve the problems together > if any. > But I think it will never happen... > > #Luc > The disgusted Treasurer of ESUG who will finish his week-end in bad mood > -- Janko Mivšek Smalltalk GSoC Admin Team

Feb. 9, 2014

The truth on GSOC, ESUG and bad attitude

by Luc Fabresse

Hi all, ------------ FACTS As you all know, I am the ESUG treasurer. So please find the numbers attached for the ESUG support of GSOC projects in 2013. ESUG sponsored 3 "extra-GSOC" meaning extra slots not accepted by Google. In the file it is: Alejandro Infante, Pablo Estefo and Benjamin Arezki. All in all we paid: - 3695EUR (~5000USD at that time i.e. same cost as a regular GSOC) each projects - Serge trip to Mentor summit And we received 5552EUR from Google so yes we lost ~6582EUR That is easy 13*500 USD would only cover 1 plain extra-Gsoc and we sponsorized 3. I also think that it is important to send someone to the GSoc mentor summit because it participates to the fact that Google recognizes ESUG ang gives slots the next year. It is alos important to note dates. ESUG paid first and then has been refund by Google. It would not be possible to do it without ESUG. ------------ FROM HERE, MY POINT OF VIEW ON THIS STORY: As some of you know, I doing the ESUG treasury stuff on my *own* time and it takes a lot! I am doing it because I strongly believe that Smalltalk (all falvors!) is a really great language that should be more widespread. I also completely open to discussions. The ESUG board can also explain its actions and even money status. I can do errors too. So if Janko wants some details on GSOC related money, JUST ASK! I cannot admit that: - Janko wrote about some money accusation. This is directly directed against the treasurer so me. And honestly, just reading again that I am biased and that I hide or steal money make me think that I should better quit. - Janko asked for apologies! what is that? even if I would have done a mistake (and ESUG did not loose money), YOU STILL MUST THANK ME for DOING THIS BORING TASK! and then I can correct mistakes if any - People wants an answer fast, this conversation started yesterday and I am spending my week-end with my kids I am really fed up with this kind of attitude. Stop accuse, better ask, discuss and we will solve the problems together if any. But I think it will never happen... #Luc The disgusted Treasurer of ESUG who will finish his week-end in bad mood

Feb. 9, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] About GSOC mess: Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name

by Clément Bera

I'm really happy to hear that. I think one reason why ESUG tends to be Pharo biased is the lack of projects from other Smalltalk dialects. ESUG and GSOC cannot give money to projects that does not exist. I would love to see this year Squeak, Amber, Pharo, VW, Smalltalk X, GNU smalltalk AND Visual age projects. Then it is the duty to each mentor to advertise his project to find good students and to have his project accepted. We all know that it is a lot of work, but last years all mentors worked hard and the community had good results. Please future mentors propose a project in your favourite smalltalk dialect and do your best to have your GSOC accepted. 2014-02-09 12:58 GMT+01:00 Frank Shearar <frank.shearar(a)gmail.com>: > The Squeak Oversight Board would like to see GSoC projects continue > under the European Smalltalk User Group. > > The Squeak community plans to present several projects this year. > > frank > > On 8 February 2014 09:50, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> > wrote: > > Dear community > > > > On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors(a)googlegroups.com janko is kind of > declaring > > that ESUG was not doing a good job managing > > GSOC. We feel insulted and we are quite concerned by that fact. > Personally > > if students would not be involved I would vote that ESUG does not have > > anything to do with GSOC. Because it costs us money, time and stress. > Note > > in addition that we never interferred with the choice or anything. > > > > I will ask the ESUG board to decide because we cannot do the job, spend > > time, money and be treated like that. > > Sorry! We are sad but this is like that. > > > > Then we do not like the kind of mails that Janko is sending us about the > > fact that ESUG is biased towards Pharo. > > Where are the research teams and teachers? Of course: the mails of janko > > are just so nice. I let you judge. > > > > It is particularly fun since this year we (the pharo board) decided not > to > > organise a Pharo conference to avoid competing with ESUG. > > > > About motivations for my proposal: > > > > 1. 'Smalltalk' is more recognizable name on first spot that 'ESUG' . And > > this matters when a student looks at around 150 GSoC organizations to > > choose, which one to check and try. See last year list of orgs. > > > > 2. ESUG is currently regarded by many as too biased towards Pharo. Let we > > avoid starting debating is this is true or not. Making our org more > > independent will I hope remove any remaining doubt about that. > > > > > > > > I feel shocked and insulted but I take it easy, having success make you > as > > easy target for jaleous people. This is strange that > > some people would prefer to have a non existing/moving open-source > > smalltalk. May be the losers theory. > > > > I added the answer of marcus below (because marcus usually is much calmer > > than me) so that Janko succeeded to get marcus reacting like that is a > nice > > proof in itself. > > > > Seriously Smalltalk is in a so good shape in presence of lua, Javascript, > > ruby and python, clojure that we should fight. > > > > Excellent idea thank for this nice initiative. > > > > Stef > > > > > > > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > > > From: Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek(a)gmail.com> > > Subject: [gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name > > Date: 8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 > > To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors(a)googlegroups.com > > Reply-To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors(a)googlegroups.com > > > > Dear mentors, > > > > I propose that we run this year GSoC simply under 'Smalltalk' name. > > Mentoring organization will be us mentors of past and current GSoCs, as > the > > name 'mentoring organization' implies anyway. Such organization therefore > > doesn't need to be some kind of legal entity. > > > > Because I need to open a new website and we have only one week to > deadline, > > decision needs to be done soon. > > > > Best regards > > Janko > > > > --- > > Janko Mivšek > > Smalltalk GSoC Admin Team > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Smalltalk GSoC mentors" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > > email to smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe(a)googlegroups.com. > > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > > > > > > > Of course you need it: I filled out quite some paperwork for Google. > ESUG is > > an official Google supplier, for that I filled american tax forms and so > on. > > > > Without an organisation that will be very difficult. How do yu receive > money > > for the flight if someone goes to the meeting in the fall? > > > > One of the reasons why the Smalltalk GSOC was accepted was I think that > it > > was the same organisation that is already in the books of google. > > > > And I do not see why to change that: ESUG did a good job, we even lost > money > > (that is, we spend more money on additional Summer of Code slots > > than got in with the money from google). > > We payed all additional expenses of the people going to the Summit: > Google > > only pays the flight and hotel. Everyhting else not (e.g. going from the > > airpot > > to the hotel). > > > > > > What we need to discuss this year is if additional slots make sense: We > had > > last year the fast that > > a) it was very expensive for ESUG > > b) even then, we got complaints that it was unfair that we did not pay > the > > same as google > > c) that it was very extremely unfair that the student could not put > “Google > > Summer of Code” on the CV. > > > > The last is the Killer: money from ESUG is just money. GSoC is more. So > we > > ask if it is really worth to spend the money > > if even the students are not happy about it. > > > > And if your motivation behind is that this way you think it will be > easier > > to enable “Quotas” for different Smalltalks: I think this is a dumb > idea. > > > > Yes, Pharo is very active. So could every other Smalltalk be, too. They > just > > need to do it. If they do not, it is not my duty to limit > > my activity for “Fairness”. Limiting the activity level of those who do > to > > be more “in line” with what those do who do nothing is just > > *insane*. It’s a description of death itself. > > > > Marcus > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Esug-list mailing list > > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org > > > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org >

Feb. 9, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] About GSOC mess: Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name

by Joachim Tuchel

Hi, we've had the bias debate before - the end of the story was that while some people thought it might look like people in the esug board could be biased, it showed most people who joined the discussion don't bother. And if I remember the thing why the discussion was started back then was not done, so I guess we can forget about that for now. Just one comment: I cannot read from Janko's mail that he thinks esug didn't do a good job of makin gsoc a reality. I was never involved, so I cannot tell if that is thanks to Janko's help or if it was an avhievement of the esug board. In the end, it probably doesnt even matter: the outcome was positive. Re: too much pharo. Is the pharo community to blame for the fact that it generates most interest? I personally would like to see more cross-smalltalk ideas in gsoc, but not having enough time and courage to act as a mentor, who am I to complain? Again, I didn't read Jankos comments as an accusation, more like the attempt to motivate people in other dialects to come out and play. I think Janko and the people who worked with him the last years to make things happen have done a great job and I am happy we've had Smalltalk projects happen, even if I personally have not used any of the contributions. For some, I cant even tell if they went anywhere. For those, fighting is useless, and for the others not worth it: they're open source and can be ported to any dialect. So it would be a pity if we lost Janko's drive and even more if we couldn't be part of gsoc this year due to this debate. I also think a new organization is way too much work and cannot see any problems with esug being the umbrella for Smalltalk projects in gsoc. The worst thing that could happen is another broken link to ancient and outdated Smalltalk information. We've had enough of that. Esug, as any other organization, may not be perfect, but it's the best we have. If it's about domain names, we sure will find sponsors to rent a few smalltalk names and redirect them - althiugh I think promoting what we have a bit more would help more than that. just my 2 cents, Joachim Frank Shearar <frank.shearar(a)gmail.com> schrieb: >The Squeak Oversight Board would like to see GSoC projects continue >under the European Smalltalk User Group. > >The Squeak community plans to present several projects this year. > >frank > >On 8 February 2014 09:50, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: >> Dear community >> >> On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors(a)googlegroups.com janko is kind of declaring >> that ESUG was not doing a good job managing >> GSOC. We feel insulted and we are quite concerned by that fact. Personally >> if students would not be involved I would vote that ESUG does not have >> anything to do with GSOC. Because it costs us money, time and stress. Note >> in addition that we never interferred with the choice or anything. >> >> I will ask the ESUG board to decide because we cannot do the job, spend >> time, money and be treated like that. >> Sorry! We are sad but this is like that. >> >> Then we do not like the kind of mails that Janko is sending us about the >> fact that ESUG is biased towards Pharo. >> Where are the research teams and teachers? Of course: the mails of janko >> are just so nice. I let you judge. >> >> It is particularly fun since this year we (the pharo board) decided not to >> organise a Pharo conference to avoid competing with ESUG. >> >> About motivations for my proposal: >> >> 1. 'Smalltalk' is more recognizable name on first spot that 'ESUG' . And >> this matters when a student looks at around 150 GSoC organizations to >> choose, which one to check and try. See last year list of orgs. >> >> 2. ESUG is currently regarded by many as too biased towards Pharo. Let we >> avoid starting debating is this is true or not. Making our org more >> independent will I hope remove any remaining doubt about that. >> >> >> >> I feel shocked and insulted but I take it easy, having success make you as >> easy target for jaleous people. This is strange that >> some people would prefer to have a non existing/moving open-source >> smalltalk. May be the losers theory. >> >> I added the answer of marcus below (because marcus usually is much calmer >> than me) so that Janko succeeded to get marcus reacting like that is a nice >> proof in itself. >> >> Seriously Smalltalk is in a so good shape in presence of lua, Javascript, >> ruby and python, clojure that we should fight. >> >> Excellent idea thank for this nice initiative. >> >> Stef >> >> >> >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> From: Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek(a)gmail.com> >> Subject: [gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name >> Date: 8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 >> To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors(a)googlegroups.com >> Reply-To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors(a)googlegroups.com >> >> Dear mentors, >> >> I propose that we run this year GSoC simply under 'Smalltalk' name. >> Mentoring organization will be us mentors of past and current GSoCs, as the >> name 'mentoring organization' implies anyway. Such organization therefore >> doesn't need to be some kind of legal entity. >> >> Because I need to open a new website and we have only one week to deadline, >> decision needs to be done soon. >> >> Best regards >> Janko >> >> --- >> Janko Mivšek >> Smalltalk GSoC Admin Team >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "Smalltalk GSoC mentors" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe(a)googlegroups.com. >> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. >> >> >> >> >> Of course you need it: I filled out quite some paperwork for Google. ESUG is >> an official Google supplier, for that I filled american tax forms and so on. >> >> Without an organisation that will be very difficult. How do yu receive money >> for the flight if someone goes to the meeting in the fall? >> >> One of the reasons why the Smalltalk GSOC was accepted was I think that it >> was the same organisation that is already in the books of google. >> >> And I do not see why to change that: ESUG did a good job, we even lost money >> (that is, we spend more money on additional Summer of Code slots >> than got in with the money from google). >> We payed all additional expenses of the people going to the Summit: Google >> only pays the flight and hotel. Everyhting else not (e.g. going from the >> airpot >> to the hotel). >> >> >> What we need to discuss this year is if additional slots make sense: We had >> last year the fast that >> a) it was very expensive for ESUG >> b) even then, we got complaints that it was unfair that we did not pay the >> same as google >> c) that it was very extremely unfair that the student could not put “Google >> Summer of Code” on the CV. >> >> The last is the Killer: money from ESUG is just money. GSoC is more. So we >> ask if it is really worth to spend the money >> if even the students are not happy about it. >> >> And if your motivation behind is that this way you think it will be easier >> to enable “Quotas” for different Smalltalks: I think this is a dumb idea. >> >> Yes, Pharo is very active. So could every other Smalltalk be, too. They just >> need to do it. If they do not, it is not my duty to limit >> my activity for “Fairness”. Limiting the activity level of those who do to >> be more “in line” with what those do who do nothing is just >> *insane*. It’s a description of death itself. >> >> Marcus >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Esug-list mailing list >> Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org >> http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org >> > >_______________________________________________ >Esug-list mailing list >Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org >http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

Feb. 9, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] About GSOC mess: Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name

by Frank Shearar

The Squeak Oversight Board would like to see GSoC projects continue under the European Smalltalk User Group. The Squeak community plans to present several projects this year. frank On 8 February 2014 09:50, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > Dear community > > On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors(a)googlegroups.com janko is kind of declaring > that ESUG was not doing a good job managing > GSOC. We feel insulted and we are quite concerned by that fact. Personally > if students would not be involved I would vote that ESUG does not have > anything to do with GSOC. Because it costs us money, time and stress. Note > in addition that we never interferred with the choice or anything. > > I will ask the ESUG board to decide because we cannot do the job, spend > time, money and be treated like that. > Sorry! We are sad but this is like that. > > Then we do not like the kind of mails that Janko is sending us about the > fact that ESUG is biased towards Pharo. > Where are the research teams and teachers? Of course: the mails of janko > are just so nice. I let you judge. > > It is particularly fun since this year we (the pharo board) decided not to > organise a Pharo conference to avoid competing with ESUG. > > About motivations for my proposal: > > 1. 'Smalltalk' is more recognizable name on first spot that 'ESUG' . And > this matters when a student looks at around 150 GSoC organizations to > choose, which one to check and try. See last year list of orgs. > > 2. ESUG is currently regarded by many as too biased towards Pharo. Let we > avoid starting debating is this is true or not. Making our org more > independent will I hope remove any remaining doubt about that. > > > > I feel shocked and insulted but I take it easy, having success make you as > easy target for jaleous people. This is strange that > some people would prefer to have a non existing/moving open-source > smalltalk. May be the losers theory. > > I added the answer of marcus below (because marcus usually is much calmer > than me) so that Janko succeeded to get marcus reacting like that is a nice > proof in itself. > > Seriously Smalltalk is in a so good shape in presence of lua, Javascript, > ruby and python, clojure that we should fight. > > Excellent idea thank for this nice initiative. > > Stef > > > > > Begin forwarded message: > > From: Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek(a)gmail.com> > Subject: [gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name > Date: 8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 > To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors(a)googlegroups.com > Reply-To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors(a)googlegroups.com > > Dear mentors, > > I propose that we run this year GSoC simply under 'Smalltalk' name. > Mentoring organization will be us mentors of past and current GSoCs, as the > name 'mentoring organization' implies anyway. Such organization therefore > doesn't need to be some kind of legal entity. > > Because I need to open a new website and we have only one week to deadline, > decision needs to be done soon. > > Best regards > Janko > > --- > Janko Mivšek > Smalltalk GSoC Admin Team > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Smalltalk GSoC mentors" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe(a)googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out. > > > > > Of course you need it: I filled out quite some paperwork for Google. ESUG is > an official Google supplier, for that I filled american tax forms and so on. > > Without an organisation that will be very difficult. How do yu receive money > for the flight if someone goes to the meeting in the fall? > > One of the reasons why the Smalltalk GSOC was accepted was I think that it > was the same organisation that is already in the books of google. > > And I do not see why to change that: ESUG did a good job, we even lost money > (that is, we spend more money on additional Summer of Code slots > than got in with the money from google). > We payed all additional expenses of the people going to the Summit: Google > only pays the flight and hotel. Everyhting else not (e.g. going from the > airpot > to the hotel). > > > What we need to discuss this year is if additional slots make sense: We had > last year the fast that > a) it was very expensive for ESUG > b) even then, we got complaints that it was unfair that we did not pay the > same as google > c) that it was very extremely unfair that the student could not put “Google > Summer of Code” on the CV. > > The last is the Killer: money from ESUG is just money. GSoC is more. So we > ask if it is really worth to spend the money > if even the students are not happy about it. > > And if your motivation behind is that this way you think it will be easier > to enable “Quotas” for different Smalltalks: I think this is a dumb idea. > > Yes, Pharo is very active. So could every other Smalltalk be, too. They just > need to do it. If they do not, it is not my duty to limit > my activity for “Fairness”. Limiting the activity level of those who do to > be more “in line” with what those do who do nothing is just > *insane*. It’s a description of death itself. > > Marcus > > > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org >

Feb. 9, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] Moving on with GSOC2014?

by Steven Kelly

+1. It would be a great service to Smalltalk if we could keep discussions like these calm and on topic. ________________________________ From: Esug-list on behalf of Sean DeNigris Sent: Sat 08/02/2014 21:04 To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors(a)googlegroups.com Cc: ESUG Mailing list Subject: Re: [Esug-list] Moving on with GSOC2014? I think "Moving On" is the perfect subject. This debate is surreal - creating issues and drama out of thin air. While it's a great demonstration of the passion we all have for Smalltalk, there seems to be some real damage being done. Bottom Line: I agree that it is too late to change anything for this year. And when we do discuss it, let's take a big step back. The two issues Janko raised were: - "Smalltalk" as a name may be better received by students - Within the Smalltalk community, there is perceived bias of ESUG toward Pharo Let's take them one at a time: =="Smalltalk" as a name may be better received by students== 1. Are we having trouble finding quality students now? If so, it pays to discuss. But if we are happy with the current results, IIABDFI 2. If we need to improve, is this particular improvement worth risking: - the possibility that the continuity of ESUG may have helped our acceptance by Google - the tremendous resources, whether time/energy/financial, put in by ESUG ==Within the Smalltalk community, there is perceived bias of ESUG toward Pharo== There's really only one thing to say about this. As it stands now, there is one person's perception of other people's perception. While as Smalltalkers, we can all appreciate the meta-ness of that ;), if such a perception exists, let those who perceive it stand up and give some evidence. Let's focus on the facts, make the best decision for our community, and get back to work.

Feb. 8, 2014

Re: [Esug-list] Moving on with GSOC2014?

by Johan Fabry

+1 on all this. On Feb 8, 2014, at 4:04 PM, Sean DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: > I think "Moving On" is the perfect subject. This debate is surreal - creating issues and drama out of thin air. While it's a great demonstration of the passion we all have for Smalltalk, there seems to be some real damage being done. > > Bottom Line: I agree that it is too late to change anything for this year. > > And when we do discuss it, let's take a big step back. The two issues Janko raised were: > - "Smalltalk" as a name may be better received by students > - Within the Smalltalk community, there is perceived bias of ESUG toward Pharo > > Let's take them one at a time: > > =="Smalltalk" as a name may be better received by students== > 1. Are we having trouble finding quality students now? If so, it pays to discuss. But if we are happy with the current results, IIABDFI > 2. If we need to improve, is this particular improvement worth risking: > - the possibility that the continuity of ESUG may have helped our acceptance by Google > - the tremendous resources, whether time/energy/financial, put in by ESUG > > ==Within the Smalltalk community, there is perceived bias of ESUG toward Pharo== > There's really only one thing to say about this. As it stands now, there is one person's perception of other people's perception. While as Smalltalkers, we can all appreciate the meta-ness of that ;), if such a perception exists, let those who perceive it stand up and give some evidence. > > Let's focus on the facts, make the best decision for our community, and get back to work. > _______________________________________________ > Esug-list mailing list > Esug-list(a)lists.esug.org > http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org ---> Save our in-boxes! http://emailcharter.org <--- Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile

Feb. 8, 2014