Whats Happening with 3.10. And how is it going to proceed?
johnson at cs.uiuc.edu
Tue Jan 9 18:12:34 UTC 2007
On 1/7/07, Jerome Peace <peace_the_dreamer at yahoo.com> wrote:
> This is mostly to the board and the 3.10 team.
> A new year naturally brings questions about
> resolutions and time lines.
> Is 3.10 going to be time boxed?
> If so what are the timelines and deliveralbles?
According to my proposal, the alpha will be in January and the final
will be in June.
There is a mailing list v3dot10 at lists.squeakfoundation.org for talking
about 3.10 and everybody who is even slightly interested is welcome to
> So far the 3.10 folder on the ftp site is empty.
> Can the 3.10alpha image be placed there?
> That would be one easy deliveralbe.
An image is easy. Edgar has been making them for several months. I
want to make sure that things like the update process and the testing
process are in place.
> My wishes for the new year are that:
> -whatever process is evolved to assembling 3.9 that an
> update stream would be established as a last word.
Yes. It looks like we will probably use Installer for this.
> -my other wish is there would be a "full" image team.
> These fine folks would be responsible for deciding
> what packages would be released as "3.10" full. One
> of the tests for the release is that these packages
> could be loaded and work as the 3.10 basic image goes
My plan is that, once a testing environment is set up, we will certify
packages as "confirming" or "official" or "compatible". (I'm still
looking for a good name.) This means that they load into the image
and do not break any tests, and their tests pass, too. it is too much
trouble to do this testing by hand, but once we have an automatic way
of doing it then it should not be hard to keep a lot of packages on
> -My final wish is to, as soon as possible, get back to
> a state where version histories are present enough so
> those of us who bug track have a way of finding out
> when and how things changed. Who changed them. And a
> good chance of guessing why and with what intent. I am
> indeed having difficulty with that with 3.9-7067.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. We want to have a complete
history of what we did so it is possible to go back and time to find
when things stopped working. Why can't you do this for 3.9?
More information about the Squeak-dev