About GSOC mess: Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name
Dear community On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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@gmail.com> Subject: [gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name Date: 8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com Reply-To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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@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
Dear Smalltalkers, Stef is overreacting as always, going off-topic and don't want to see the real reasons behind this proposal. Which is to make GSoC attractive to all Smalltalkers by removing the last doubt about the any bias towards any Smalltalk or group. That's why I propose to go more independent under new name 'Smalltalk', besides a clearly better visibility of such name of course. I invite you to follow the debate on GSoC mentor list: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors All mentors with voting rights on past GSoCs please join back to this mailing list and help with debate: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/join Best regards Janko Dne 08. 02. 2014 10:50, piše Stéphane Ducasse:
Dear community
On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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 <http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org/list/public/google/gsoc2013>.
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@gmail.com <mailto:janko.mivsek@gmail.com>> *Subject: **[gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name* *Date: *8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 *To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> *Reply-To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@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@lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
-- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si
the only thing that I can say is that you cannot say “ESUG is biased” and not wait a response… if you make accusations you will have the concerned people reacting. Imagine I say in list “Janko is a bad person, but lets avoid that discussion”… obviously that will not happen (and please notice, I’m not saying you are, I’m just using it as an example of a bad choice of argument). Esteban On 08 Feb 2014, at 11:25, Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@eranova.si> wrote:
Dear Smalltalkers,
Stef is overreacting as always, going off-topic and don't want to see the real reasons behind this proposal. Which is to make GSoC attractive to all Smalltalkers by removing the last doubt about the any bias towards any Smalltalk or group. That's why I propose to go more independent under new name 'Smalltalk', besides a clearly better visibility of such name of course.
I invite you to follow the debate on GSoC mentor list:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors
All mentors with voting rights on past GSoCs please join back to this mailing list and help with debate:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/join
Best regards Janko
Dne 08. 02. 2014 10:50, piše Stéphane Ducasse:
Dear community
On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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 <http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org/list/public/google/gsoc2013>.
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@gmail.com <mailto:janko.mivsek@gmail.com>> *Subject: **[gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name* *Date: *8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 *To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> *Reply-To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@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@lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
-- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si
_______________________________________________ Esug-list mailing list Esug-list@lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
It's remarkable that for such a small community, centred around an amazing language, we end up being so balkanised (with apologies to the Balkans for using that term). I really don't think setting up a yet another new grouping will help. Unless we we like the balkanisation (I don't) we should work to identify and group around some centre of gravity. Are we really a community worthy of the term 'community'? I do hope we are. On 8 February 2014 10:33, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
the only thing that I can say is that you cannot say “ESUG is biased” and not wait a response… if you make accusations you will have the concerned people reacting. Imagine I say in list “Janko is a bad person, but lets avoid that discussion”… obviously that will not happen (and please notice, I’m not saying you are, I’m just using it as an example of a bad choice of argument).
Esteban
On 08 Feb 2014, at 11:25, Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek@eranova.si> wrote:
Dear Smalltalkers,
Stef is overreacting as always, going off-topic and don't want to see the real reasons behind this proposal. Which is to make GSoC attractive to all Smalltalkers by removing the last doubt about the any bias towards any Smalltalk or group. That's why I propose to go more independent under new name 'Smalltalk', besides a clearly better visibility of such name of course.
I invite you to follow the debate on GSoC mentor list:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors
All mentors with voting rights on past GSoCs please join back to this mailing list and help with debate:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/join
Best regards Janko
Dne 08. 02. 2014 10:50, piše Stéphane Ducasse:
Dear community
On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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 <http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org/list/public/google/gsoc2013>.
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@gmail.com <mailto:janko.mivsek@gmail.com>> *Subject: **[gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name* *Date: *8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 *To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> *Reply-To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@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@lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
-- Janko Mivšek Aida/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si
_______________________________________________ Esug-list mailing list Esug-list@lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
_______________________________________________ Esug-list mailing list Esug-list@lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
-- Make the most of your skills - with OpenSkills http://www.openskills.org/
+ 1 :)
the only thing that I can say is that you cannot say “ESUG is biased” and not wait a response… if you make accusations you will have the concerned people reacting. Imagine I say in list “Janko is a bad person, but lets avoid that discussion”… obviously that will not happen (and please notice, I’m not saying you are, I’m just using it as an example of a bad choice of argument).
Esteban
Guys, could you please stop this debate and focus all this energy on proposing good topics instead? Try to actually accomplish something? Is this what we want to show as a community? Hasn't this discussion done enough harm already to the image we show to the world? Come on... Let's try to be a better community together, not a worse one. Janko Mivšek writes:
Dear Smalltalkers,
Stef is overreacting as always, going off-topic and don't want to see the real reasons behind this proposal. Which is to make GSoC attractive to all Smalltalkers by removing the last doubt about the any bias towards any Smalltalk or group. That's why I propose to go more independent under new name 'Smalltalk', besides a clearly better visibility of such name of course.
I invite you to follow the debate on GSoC mentor list:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors
All mentors with voting rights on past GSoCs please join back to this mailing list and help with debate:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/join
Best regards Janko
Dne 08. 02. 2014 10:50, piše Stéphane Ducasse:
Dear community
On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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 <http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org/list/public/google/gsoc2013>.
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@gmail.com <mailto:janko.mivsek@gmail.com>> *Subject: **[gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name* *Date: *8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 *To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> *Reply-To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@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@lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
-- Nicolas Petton http://nicolas-petton.fr
Guys, could you please stop this debate and focus all this energy on proposing good topics instead? Try to actually accomplish something?
this is what I’m doing since years.
Is this what we want to show as a community? Hasn't this discussion done enough harm already to the image we show to the world? Come on... Let's try to be a better community together, not a worse one.
Exactly so people should start not to piss on us :) And judge on what we are doing: - new lectures in cameron - support prague community - supporting FAST - supporting new books - pushing to get new lectures (delft, lugano and others I hope that they will be able to do so) Stef
Dear Smalltalkers,
Stef is overreacting as always, going off-topic and don't want to see the real reasons behind this proposal. Which is to make GSoC attractive to all Smalltalkers by removing the last doubt about the any bias towards any Smalltalk or group. That's why I propose to go more independent under new name 'Smalltalk', besides a clearly better visibility of such name of course.
I invite you to follow the debate on GSoC mentor list:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors
All mentors with voting rights on past GSoCs please join back to this mailing list and help with debate:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/join
Best regards Janko
Dne 08. 02. 2014 10:50, piše Stéphane Ducasse:
Dear community
On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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 <http://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org/list/public/google/gsoc2013>.
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@gmail.com <mailto:janko.mivsek@gmail.com>> *Subject: **[gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name* *Date: *8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 *To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com> *Reply-To: *smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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@googlegroups.com <mailto:smalltalk-gsoc-mentors+unsubscribe@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@lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
-- Nicolas Petton http://nicolas-petton.fr
_______________________________________________ Esug-list mailing list Esug-list@lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Il 08/02/2014 11:25, Janko Mivšek ha scritto:
Which is to make GSoC attractive to all Smalltalkers by removing the last doubt about the any bias towards any Smalltalk or group.
Janko, I don't think that anyone has any doubt about that. The number of proposals is obviously influenced by the popularity of dialects, but I'm 101% sure that prospective mentors are going to vote for them according to the value of the proposal and not the chosen dialect. I also don't see the point of investing so much into your own selection system. Google's is "interesting" in some cases, but it's gotten better and better every year. You're free of course to do what you want as the org admin, but I think the choice can only make things more confusing. Paolo
That's why I propose to go more independent under new name 'Smalltalk', besides a clearly better visibility of such name of course.
I invite you to follow the debate on GSoC mentor list:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors
All mentors with voting rights on past GSoCs please join back to this mailing list and help with debate:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/join
Hi Paolo during the last ESUg board meeting we discussed (post mortem conference analysis and yearly assessment) and arrived to the same conclusion. Stef
Janko, I don't think that anyone has any doubt about that. The number of proposals is obviously influenced by the popularity of dialects, but I'm 101% sure that prospective mentors are going to vote for them according to the value of the proposal and not the chosen dialect.
I also don't see the point of investing so much into your own selection system. Google's is "interesting" in some cases, but it's gotten better and better every year. You're free of course to do what you want as the org admin, but I think the choice can only make things more confusing.
Paolo
That's why I propose to go more independent under new name 'Smalltalk', besides a clearly better visibility of such name of course.
I invite you to follow the debate on GSoC mentor list:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors
All mentors with voting rights on past GSoCs please join back to this mailing list and help with debate:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/smalltalk-gsoc-mentors/join
_______________________________________________ Esug-list mailing list Esug-list@lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
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@inria.fr> wrote:
Dear community
On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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@gmail.com> Subject: [gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name Date: 8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com Reply-To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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@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@lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
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@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@inria.fr> wrote:
Dear community
On the smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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@gmail.com> Subject: [gsoc-mentors] Running under 'Smalltalk' org. name Date: 8 Feb 2014 08:46:18 GMT+1 To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@googlegroups.com Reply-To: smalltalk-gsoc-mentors@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@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@lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
_______________________________________________ Esug-list mailing list Esug-list@lists.esug.org http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
participants (8)
-
Bruce Badger -
Clément Bera -
Esteban Lorenzano -
Frank Shearar -
Janko Mivšek -
Nicolas Petton -
Paolo Bonzini -
Stéphane Ducasse