[Squeakfoundation]re: release prioritization (was "ClassBuilder problem")

Daniel Vainsencher danielv at netvision.net.il
Fri Feb 28 01:30:58 UTC 2003

I second Craig - let's release.

As I've said before, when thinking about adding any sort of fix at this
point we need to weight the real cost of adding it (including risks that
the bug fix is imperfect, or reveals another bug, or..) to the real cost
of not adding it (remember we can back port a bug fix to a finalized
version, after the change has been tested to death in the new
development version, if we get complaints about it).

In this specific case, IIUC, the analysis is like this -
1. Not that many newbies try to reshape ClassDescription.
2. Archive viewer bug fix gets auto-installed by SARInstaller (which,
btw, has it's own problems).

Therefore, release without it, patch later iff needed.


Craig Latta <craig at netjam.org> wrote:
> 	Colin writes:
> > I think it would be worth delaying the release of 3.4 to include this 
> > fix. Having easy-to-install packages for Traits and Islands would be 
> > very beneficial. The more people can play around with and exercise
> > that code, the better.
> 	I don't think that's a convincing rationale for inclusion in 3.4. The
> 3.4 release is a vehicle for SqueakMap. I think only problems which have
> a catastrophic effect on a newcomer's ability to use SqueakMap should
> delay 3.4.
> 	Ned writes (on the Foundation list):
> > ...since Andreas just posted the ClassBuilder fix, I'm thinking that
> > may be worth including and postponing the release by a few days for
> > people to test.
> 	Why? (And I don't use question marks lightly in this message, since I
> know they could cause more delay. :)
> > Since I'm doing that, I could also perhaps include Ned's recent
> > ArchiveViewer fix, since I've looked at that and its seems
> > straightforward and is a somewhat important fix.
> 	(:
> 	I don't think "somewhat important" cuts it at this release stage.
> Instead, I think it's better to weigh the results of leaving something
> out, rather than of including it.
> 	My recollection of our group discussions at OOPSLA, in November 2002,
> were that we would take 3.2, add SqueakMap support to it, and release it
> as 3.4. It is now February 2003. This surprises me, even given our
> history. :)
> 	I think we should release 3.4 now, and defer all outstanding available
> fixes into the 3.5a stream (subject to harvester approval). In our
> current situation, I think anyone likely to encounter the bugs described
> recently will be able to get them easily from the update stream. In the
> meantime, newcomers will have easier access to SqueakMap sooner. I think
> it's time to release.
> 	thanks,
> -C
> --
> Craig Latta
> improvisational musical informaticist
> craig at netjam.org
> www.netjam.org/resume
> Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)]
> _______________________________________________
> Squeakfoundation mailing list
> Squeakfoundation at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list