[Squeakfoundation]Proposed 3.5 release plan
danielv at netvision.net.il
Wed Mar 12 23:14:32 CET 2003
I'd like to get the removing process underway, and get our new
harvesting process warmed up, and then we have a lot to talk about -
* Shutting up the network classes use of UI (hopefully, based on
* Using one of the Streams-should-not-represent-resources refactorings
* Streams-should-be-clean (Flow again)
* Closures, which require replacing the compiler with Anthony's SmaCC
based parser+RB AST+visitors, and adding primitives
* And yes, somewhere in there, an image format change.
Doug Way <dway at riskmetrics.com> wrote:
> Daniel Vainsencher wrote:
> > Sounds fine to me. Small comments -
> > In my eyes, the reason is more to have an unusually clean release,
> > before we an unusual mess of things by starting to pull stuff out, than
> > to fix any two particular bugs. Those two happen to be ones we'd like to
> > release before 3.6.
> Yes, I'll add a comment about wanting to have a release free of major bugs as
> a sort of baseline fr people to use, before the "turmoil" of package removal
> etc. in 3.6 begins.
> > I think if we haven't decided it by now, it's quite unlikely that 3.5+1
> > will be 4.0. We haven't prepared for or talked about a compatibility
> > break at all, and it seems to me like the sort of thing you want to do
> > right at the beginning of a release cycle. So 3.6 is pretty definite.
> I agree. I think there's been a sort of assumption that we would want to get
> started with splitting packages off of the image for at least one release
> before worrying about a possible image format change. So if there are no
> objections I'll remove the tentative tone about "3.6" in the announcement and
> declare that the post-3.5 release will definitely be called 3.6.
> We will need to start thinking about when a possible image format change might
> happen, which Tim brought up recently. I think we're agreed that a major
> version number change should be used for an image format change, it's just a
> matter of when... we could go from 3.6 -> 4.0, or 3.6 -> 3.7 -> 4.0, or...
> Anyway, we don't have to decide on that now. Perhaps Tim can comment further.
> - Doug Way
> Squeakfoundation mailing list
> Squeakfoundation at lists.squeakfoundation.org
More information about the Squeakfoundation