As things stand now, I don't think there is enough mutual trust between ESUG and Janko to proceed with GSOC2014. I think either the name is changed to "Smalltalk" as Janko proposed, which many people have objected to, or he should take a step back. I have experience with GSOC having served as admin for the GNU project in 2011 so, if necessary, I volunteer to run the organization as admin (and as ESUG). I want to point out _very_ clearly, from the beginning that I wouldn't want to have anything to do with any "extra slots" like there were last year. This would be something for ESUG to sort out if they have the money. Now, I cannot deny that I haven't been involved very much in Smalltalk programming for the last few years. On the other hand administration is mostly bureaucratic work, and I clearly have no bias in favor or against any particular dialect. Regards, Paolo
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.
+1 on all this. On Feb 8, 2014, at 4:04 PM, Sean DeNigris <sean@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@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
+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@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.
participants (4)
-
Johan Fabry -
Paolo Bonzini -
Sean DeNigris -
Steven Kelly