Hi Dan,
    Thanks for the info. The thing that prompted my rant was nervousness
about what is likely to happen with Squeak 3.2, and beyond, as everyone
slices, dices, refactors, modularizes, and does whatever else it takes
with respect to the attempt to componentize Squeak.
    It seems that Squeak 3.1 could be the last monolithic, Morphic
version of the beast, much in the same sense that Squeak 2.8 was the
last monolithic, MVC version. It gives everyone a chance to stop, relax,
and take a deep breath before charging off in a new direction.
    While I have a lot of experience with computers, my Squeak skills
are pretty meager at this point, but growing, else I'd try to help with
this.
Cheers, Roger.....

Dan Ingalls wrote:
> 
> "Roger Vossler" <rvossler at qwest.net> queried...
> >    Any indication when Squeak 3.1 for the Macintosh is going
> >to be available?
> >cheers, Roger.....
> 
> Glad you asked... ;-).
> 
> As soon as someone else shows some interest in it.  It began with Stephane
> Ducasse writing to me,
> 
> >I was wondering if it would not be wise to have an official version of
> >Squeak now. Like that we can have the time to work on the new versions with
> >modules.
> >
> >Else the module process from my experience may take some time and having a
> >new version now could be referred as the version before the modules.
> >Especially because 3.0 was put together in a hurry and is not really good
> >for demoes and the like. For example I'm writing columns and I'm referring
> >to 2.8 because 3.0 has broken examples and I would love to move to 3.1. In
> >addition this also give a new release which is good (like microsoft) people
> >have to upgrade. As an example I could put 3.1 on the cd with the article
> >and say the new Squeak ;).
> 
> I then went through the whole process of closing off the 3.1 update stream,
> inserting updates for converting to 3.1beta or 3.2alpha.  I also set up a
> mechanism for forwarding selected 3.2 updates (ie bug fixes) into the 3.1beta
> stream so we could clean up any last-minute bugs in 3.1.  I wrote the following
> message to everyone on the Squeak-dev list on October 3:
> 
> >About 3.1beta...
> >I have set up a very simple mechanism for easing 3.1 into stability if we
> >follow a couple of guidelines.  I would like it if some affinity group would
> >form around the notion of a stable 3.1 release.  They can then flag various
> >3.2alpha updates as being candidates for 3.1beta.  These should be only those
> >that will make the system MORE STABLE.  I will then accept a list of numbers
> >(being the numbers of such updates), and issue exactly those updates into the
> >3.1beta stream.  The stable release crew can then test again, fix bugs, etc.,
> >until we think were stable.  Then I will go through the usual process of
> >cleaning up changeSets, changes files, etc, and we'll have a release.
> 
> In a flash, Henrik Gedenryd <Henrik.Gedenryd at lucs.lu.se> wrote:
> > Squeak3.1beta-4411.zip is ready.
> 
> and Bruce ONeel <beoneel at bluewin.ch> replied within the day:
> >Thanks very much.  It's up on the ftp site in 3.0/unstable-testPilot.
> 
> Since then I have heard not a peep from Stephane or anyone else on the
> list -- nada, zilch, in other words, a perfect vacuum -- until your message.
> 
> It's all set up, ready for beta test as it has been for four (count 'em)
> weeks. If anyone is interested, read what I wrote, and together (ahem) we
> can release Squeak 3.1.
> 
> Thanks
>         - Dan