It's maybe not the best wording, but I think it's a good way to look at things. There's not much to be gained from several identical and competing Smalltalks, either for each individually or for the community as a whole, so it seems natural that one or more might want to keep their options open for "making a break" from Smalltalk. I don't think the world outside Smalltalk sees much value in something being "Smalltalk standard compatible", but it does see value in individual parts of Smalltalk (language, core libraries, IDE, ethos). Thinking freely from a starting point of Smalltalk might give rise to something that includes most that is great about Smalltalk, with extra good it's from other ecosystems, and its own improvements. As every non-Smalltalker knows "Smalltalk failed", having a new identity would make the result more marketable. I'm not saying this is the right approach, and certainly not the only one (I love my Smalltalk!), but it seems reasonable enough. Good luck to all! Steve -----Original Message----- From: "Helge Nowak" <hknowak@yahoo.de> Sent: ‎31/‎07/‎2014 13:08 To: "pharo-business@lists.pharo.org" <pharo-business@lists.pharo.org>; "pharo-consortium@lists.gforge.inria.fr" <pharo-consortium@lists.gforge.inria.fr>; "ESUG" <esug-list@lists.esug.org> Subject: [Esug-list] "Pharo is Smalltalk inspired" Dear Pharoers, I stumbled upon Doru’s (BTW excellent, as usual) presentation on Live Objects at NDC 2014. In there he states “Pharo is Smalltalk inspired. … we want to point ourselves that we are Smalltalk inspired because we want to move towards the future”. This implies three things: Pharo is NOT Smalltalk All Smalltalks are not moving towards the future The Pharo community wants to get divorced from the community that gave them birth I am wondering whether this is indeed the official position of the Pharo community? And how the Smalltalkers think about it. Cheers Helge