I still think you are being too harsh. At any rate, people are successfully using Squeak for everything from toys to research to products. It's a fact. So why don't we talk about how to do better, instead of how to do tolerably?
Michael Latta lattam@mac.com wrote:
- Citing applications that serve the Squeak community as evidence of
Squeak's production quality is not sufficient if your target is end-users that do not care about Squeak and only care about getting their work done. There may be uses of swiki that fit this example, but I suspect that swiki uses a small percentage of the code in the full image.
Most Swikis are *not* used by Squeakers. minnow has about 15 non-squeak swikis and about 5 squeak ones, and that's the very server the Squeak swiki is on. swiki.cc.gatech.edu has 235 swikis, and by my quick glance, *none* are related to Squeak itself. All of these users don't care about squeak and just want to get their work done. Most of them probably don't even know what the "s" in swiki stands for.
Your last line is only true if what I want to do is what others have wanted Squeak to do, and have invested the effort in fixing/finishing.
Isn't that the nature of the beast? Either you write it yoruself, or you find code that someone else has had an interest in writing. How else are you going to get code?
Yes, there are a lot of things Squeak has, and a lot of things it doesn't. That is not a very deep observation, if you think about it...
The 3.8 release is advertised as supporting multi-lingual features, but the code is completely uncommented, and I was unable to find external documentation, or get a simple answer from the list on the level of support.
3.8 is still under development. The multi-lingual stuff hasn't been mixed in very well. I haven't even switched over to 3.8 yet, and I'm a very heavy Squeak user!
I compare this with other open source projects that have regular build schedules,
Do we need this in Squeak? What would be build, exactly? I guess we could re-install the packages automatically, and re-run the tests automatically.
code documentation and comments
Some code is documented, some not. Just like in most projects.
and bug tracking that is clearly available from their website
We have had just such a bug tracker for about 6 months. It's linked from the swiki, and is fairly quick to find. It's not on squeak.org yet, because that seems to get updated less frequently.
Overall, thanks for your ideas on improving Squeak. Keep in mind, though, that some of this stuff actually exists (like production code and bug trackers), and some of it is not as important for us (like regular builds). On the other hand, there is surely plenty of stuff we could steal from other groups, and any particulars you can point out are great.
In addition, you might think about posting changesets instead of rants. If you a feature commented that does not work as advertised, then change the comment and click "mail to list" in a change sorter. Comment-only changesets are one of the easiest ways to improve Squeak, and they do get incorporated quickly.
Finally, do be sure to browse around the swiki. It has over 5000 pages of documentation.
Lex
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org