[Squeakfoundation]updating to next version after declining alpha
danielv at netvision.net.il
Fri Mar 21 21:00:19 CET 2003
Hmm, do you have any ideas on how we can do this? it seems to me that
two ideas here are in conflict -
1. "I should get backported fixes into 3.5 that worked in 3.6, without
moving into 3.6 while it's alpha"
2. "When 3.6 becomes gamma, I should be able to upgrade 3.5 after all"
You can do either one of those manually now, by simply proceeding up
only one of the upgrade paths, but I don't have ideas on how you can
On another note, some people might ask "why do you keep important stuff
in your image anyway?"
Joshua 'Schwa' Gargus <schwa at cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
> I originally posted this to squeak-dev, but it probably should have
> been sent here.
> ----- Forwarded message from Joshua 'Schwa' Gargus <schwa at cc.gatech.edu> -----
> Date: Wed, 19 Mar 2003 21:59:18 -0500
> From: "Joshua 'Schwa' Gargus" <schwa at cc.gatech.edu>
> Reply-To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
> <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
> To: Squeak Mailing List <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
> Subject: updating to next version after declining alpha
> User-Agent: Mutt/184.108.40.206i
> Delivered-To: mailman-squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> List-Id: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
> List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeak-dev>,
> <mailto:squeak-dev-request at lists.squeakfoundation.org?subject=unsubscribe>
> List-Archive: <http://lnx-12.ams-2.theinternetone.net/pipermail/squeak-dev>
> List-Post: <mailto:squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
> List-Help: <mailto:squeak-dev-request at lists.squeakfoundation.org?subject=help>
> List-Subscribe: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeak-dev>,
> <mailto:squeak-dev-request at lists.squeakfoundation.org?subject=subscribe>
> Errors-To: squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> I have a comment about Squeak version releases that may or may not
> have been discussed already. My concern relates to beginning a new
> alpha branch before the previous version is finalized. This happens
> every time, and I think that it is unavoidable.
> I currently have a 3.5 beta "living" image where I keep a lot of
> important information. I don't want to advance it to 3.6 alpha
> because I can't afford to mess it up. So, I chose to only receive
> the final fixes for the 3.5 release. However, some day 3.6 will
> be stable enough to switch to. My problem involves the uncertainty
> about being able to successfully update from a 3.5 final release
> (which may include updates after the choice about whether to go
> 3.5 or 3.6).
> Can we manage the update streams in such a way that we can be certain
> that such updates are possible? In most cases, it probably works fine
> on its own. However, I think that it is important for users to be
> able to rely on this invariant.
> ----- End forwarded message -----
> Squeakfoundation mailing list
> Squeakfoundation at lists.squeakfoundation.org
More information about the Squeakfoundation