[squeak-dev] Re: Updated trunk image (Squeak3.11-8472-alpha.zip)
Igor Stasenko
siguctua at gmail.com
Sun Dec 13 11:59:30 UTC 2009
2009/12/13 Edgar J. De Cleene <edgardec2001 at yahoo.com.ar>:
>
>
>
> On 12/13/09 8:13 AM, "Igor Stasenko" <siguctua at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> i see no problem with that, and i think none of us do. You are welcome
>> to do that.
>> It will be very useful to see, what of external packages, you think
>> worth maintaining, is broken in new micro-release, so we can deal with
>> that either by updating that package, or by making trunk changes more
>> friendly & compatible.
>
> Ok, It's what I asking for.
>
> For remove packages I stick with the original Ralph vision
> See
> http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/5908 Plan for 3.10 iteration 1
> http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/5975 History of the 3.10 release
> http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/5990 Complaints about how 3.10 is going
>
> Etc.
>
> Like before, I wish go slow and safe.
> So I ask to take Christmas as dead line to next micro release.
>
No problem. Meanwhile, feel free to ask people, how they think a
micro-release process should be organized.
Then when you will have a clear to-do list of instructions, put it on
wiki and use as a guide to make month-by-month micro releases.
I listed my steps above, but others may want to add or change something.
You also need a write permission on ftp server (if you still not
having it), where you will stockpile the released images.
> Change
>
> unloadSomeMore
> " ReleaseBuilderFor3dot11 new unloadSomeMore"
> #('SMLoader' 'SMBase' 'ScriptLoader' 'Universes' 'Installer' )
> do: [:ea | (MCPackage named: ea) unload].
> self fixObsoleteReferences
>
> Do this today if Board agree
> 3.11 have 5 less packages as 3.10 without any risk
>
> As where put the packages.
> In squeaksource if his authors care or any wish maintain
>
> Or...
> Create a orphaned repository
>
> MCHttpRepository
> location: 'http://source.squeak.org/ orphaned'
> user: ''
> password: ''
>
> What you think ?
>
I think best would be to create a separate repository for each package.
Then you can put there a package description, documentation & other
stuff which related only to that package.
While if you put everything into a single repository, it will be a
mess of many unrelated packages, without clear vision of
what packages is maintained and where, and which ones is discontinued and why.
> Edgar
>
--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|