[Squeakfoundation]updating to next version after declining alpha
dway at riskmetrics.com
Fri Mar 21 20:50:53 CET 2003
On Friday, March 21, 2003, at 05:39 PM, Joshua 'Schwa' Gargus wrote:
> Still, I don't like the idea of 3.5 final possibly being a short
> dead-end branch, especially when it is not made clear to users that
> this is the case (a newbie would have no way of knowing that loading
> updates to 3.5 after the branch to 3.6 might make it impossible to
> later update to 3.6). At the least, the rollover message could
> warn that to accept further 3.5 updates voids the guarantee that
> a later update to 3.5 will work fine.
I could improve the rollover message next time to include that. (I
assume you meant "a later update to 3.6 will work fine" above.)
Actually, the current message sort of implies that anyway, it says that
you will only be allowed to receive final fixes for the 3.5 release, if
you choose not to advance to the next alpha. Here's the 3.5beta split
"Do you wish to advance to version 3.6alpha?
[Yes] Your system will be marked as 3.6alpha, and you will
subsequently receive ''test pilot'' updates for 3.6.
[No] Your system will be marked as 3.5beta, allowing you
to receive only final fixes for the 3.5 release."
I could add it to something like "Your system will be marked as
3.5beta, allowing you to receive only final fixes for the 3.5 release.
You won't have a further opportunity to update to 3.6alpha."
Or, technically it should be "You may not have a further
opportunity..." because in some cases, if no changes go into the beta
for whatever reason, we can add another opportunity to advance when
going to gamma. This happened with 3.4beta->3.4gamma/3.5alpha.
Anyway, I'm not going to spend a lot of time thinking about whether
there's a better solution to this, because I can't imagine one right
now that's not a lot of effort. :-) Perhaps sometime in the future if
we have a generic uninstall capability.
- Doug Way
More information about the Squeakfoundation