[squeak-dev] Release process (Re: Release list: delete or not?)
keith_hodges at yahoo.co.uk
Thu Mar 11 23:39:27 UTC 2010
> I follow your schedule, not fear.
> All you put I agree, as I said.
> But if we was serious about modularization we need a different way.
Amen brother, preach it !!!
> I send a first different as usual and only Igor say yes until now.
> We could discuss all step by step.
> I wish 'fork' as few as possible.
I agree too. We do not really need more than one good kernel. The
question is where is it?
> You think having a two ways process , plain old .cs from some server
> regular trunk is good or no ?
I am using plain old cs, it is great.
Actually my cs are not quite so plain and old because I have factored
out the fileIn/fileOut code so as not to be restricted to the existing
> Because if the answer is yes, I need a procedure which is different
> as now.
> But 4.2 should be SqueakCore and we could start now for polish all.
Agreed, I think I might have a process you may like. It is like the
update stream, except you can have more than one stream.
> I think in 9 months have a baby for show you at your satisfaction in
> Cheers and I stick to people consensus.
More information about the Squeak-dev