[Squeakfoundation]Shepherding large enhancements

[Daniel Vainsencher]

I agree that time that goes by without us having package releases is
pain. Every update that breaks compatibility demands a fork of affected
packages, because we don't have releases to reflect the adaptation. 

But this seems to be dependent only on package releases and the update
stream. How does the 3.6 release aggrevate this?

One thing you may mean is that 3.6 will be disconnected from it's
appropriate package version. My proposal was to release 3.6 as Full
only, in effect making a release of the old type, as if we hadn't done
the removals, except that the packaged application will now be updated
as packages, like the SM related packages are (PackageInfo and friends).

Daniel

Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi Göran,
> 
> A silent thought:
> > IMHO SM1.1 can wait until early 3.7. Even if it breaks my 
> > heart to admit it. :-)
> 
> It can't wait any longer than 3.6. I've mentioned this before but things
> will get critical with 3.6. Once significant packages are permanently hosted
> outside the Squeak image it means we'll have some serious trouble
> maintaining these without SM1.1. For example, consider the VMMaker package -
> if that gets "out of sync" during 3.7alpha we're really screwed. The same
> holds for a number of packages but VMMaker is probably the most critical in
> this regard.
> 
> If we really want these packages to live permanently outside the image then
> we need SM1.1. Everything else is going to be one big mess and the longer
> (in terms of releases) we have to wait before it comes the worse it'll get.
> 
> Cheers,
>   - Andreas
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Squeakfoundation mailing list
> Squeakfoundation at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation