"Internal" updates (was: RE: [Squeakfoundation]Possible extra text
Wed, 15 Jan 2003 00:53:22 -0800 (PST)
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 email@example.com wrote:
> Daniel Vainsencher <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > I'm not sure which would be better, but I'm sure of this - if you update
> > into alpha it means you can afford to d/l a fresh image and update again
> > after we've fixed the mess.
> I think I agree. Unless someone is actually working in alpha land of
> course - I assume none is?!
> Sidenote: Whenever Monticello starts working sufficiently enough I
> really think that should be used instead of a stream for alpha/beta
> work. Gamma and release "branches" (like 3.2.1) would still use the
> update stream mechanism.
Sigh. Eventually I'll get back to working on Monticello, honest...
Most of the work on a new version of the model is done (that will support
branches, distributed repositories, reversible patches...). Maybe I'll
try to release just the model sometime soon, and hope someone else can
help out with the infrastructure (repositories, RPC, UI)?