[Squeakfoundation]Re: final fixes for 3.4beta
Scott Wallace
squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org
Tue, 17 Dec 2002 23:16:03 -0800
Hi, Doug, and all,
All right, these have now all been published to the 3.4beta internal
update stream, as updates 5148-5156.
I'll plan on forwarding them to the external stream on Wednesday
night, unless any objections have been heard by then.
Concerning the 3.4 gamma release, note that (as per Dan's
long-standing practice) a new *image* will be released at that time,
i.e. the gamma consists not only of the final beta code-base simply
renamed, but also of an actual image with specific content in it.
The primary point of the gamma cycle(s) is to vet and perfect that
gamma image, which will evolve into the final released 3.4 image.
For 3.4, I presume that we will make only very minor modifications to
the "Worlds of Squeak" projects found in 3.0 and 3.2. These projects
are looking pretty dated by now, but given our goals for 3.4, I think
we should probably just live with them.
The contents of the text windows on the welcome screen ("Read Me"; "A
Word of Caution", etc.) need modification as well. I have mostly
completed a basic pass at editing the contents of these windows to
bring them forward to 3.4.
If the Guides wish to provide different content for any of these
windows in the release image, or wish to add any further information
in new windows, e.g. windows perhaps titled "SqueakMap" or "The
Squeak Guides," then now would be a good time to be authoring that
content.
Thanks,
-- Scott
At 12:13 AM -0500 12/18/02, Doug Way wrote:
>Okay, here's the final list of collected fixes for 3.4beta, which I
>now recommend that Scott include in the update stream ASAP, if there
>are no objections. I had them all loaded into an image I worked
>with for awhile.
>
>This is roughly the same as the list I sent a few days ago, except
>that it also includes:
>- Ned's fix for zip archives with subdirectories under Windows. I
>verified that this fix works.
>- I noticed that WeakMessageSend2-nk-rw seemed to require a small
>changeset (FileListRefactor1-nk) submitted around the same time as a
>prerequisite, so that should be included too. (FileListRefactor1-nk
>mostly just adds a couple of methods to the class side of FileList)
>I also played around a bit with the when:send:to: stuff and verified
>that the WeakMessageSends are getting garbage collected in this
>fixed version.
>- A recommendation to revert update #5137, the class template
>editing issue, which we discussed. We could try to address this in
>3.5alpha if we need to.
>
>A couple of these are order dependent, so they should probably be
>added to the update stream in this order:
>
>1. [FIX] WeakKeyAssn-raok (29 November 2002) * ok@cs.otago.ac.nz (29
>November 2002)
>http://swiki.gsug.org:8080/sqfixes/2842.html
>
>2. [FIX] Translation to iso-8859-1 encoding in Scamper (16 November
>2002) * Boris Gaertner (16 November 2002)
>http://swiki.gsug.org:8080/sqfixes/2770.html
>
>3. [FIX] UUID-Fix-CdG (19 November 2002) * cg@cdegroot.com (19 November 2002)
>http://swiki.gsug.org:8080/sqfixes/2786.html
>
>4. [FIX] DNSerror-ls (3 November 2002) * Lex Spoon (3 November 2002)
>http://swiki.gsug.org:8080/sqfixes/2735.html
>
>5. [FIX][3.2][3.4a] ArchiveFixes2-nk (12 November 2002) * Ned Konz
>(12 November 2002)
>http://swiki.gsug.org:8080/sqfixes/2748.html
>
>6. [FIX] RelativeZipExtractFix-nk (17 December 2002) * Ned Konz (17
>December 2002)
>http://swiki.gsug.org:8080/sqfixes/2920.html
>
>7. [FIX] FileListRefactor1-nk (8 December 2002) * Ned Konz (8 December 2002)
>http://swiki.gsug.org:8080/sqfixes/2890.html
>
>8. [FIX] WeakMessageSend2-nk-rw (8 December 2002) * Ned Konz (8 December 2002)
>http://swiki.gsug.org:8080/sqfixes/2891.html
>
>9. Revert update 5137.
>
>
>After they're added to the internal update stream, maybe we should
>push them out to the external update stream relatively soon (say, a
>day or so later?) so that the community can find any last-minute
>serious problems. From here on, we should only consider critical
>bug fixes for the 3.4 release. ("critical" would rule out any bugs
>which have been around longer than a month or two, I would say)
>
>Then, we could still shoot for moving to gamma status on the 22nd or
>so (as Daniel suggested), so that we can go final by the beginning
>of the year.
>
>- Doug