Samuel Tardieu sam@rfc1149.net wrote:
"stphane" == stphane ducasse ducasse@iam.unibe.ch writes:
I am still hoping that at some point you will change your mind, or that you will add new harvesters if more are needed.
stphane> But we cannot add them. People are harvesting or not. We stphane> just pay attention that when you harvest something we look stphane> at it and push into the unstable stream.
stphane> I think that one the problem with the unstable stream is stphane> that its items were not pushed fast enough into the alpha stphane> image.
I meant "pushers", maybe we need to add more pushers.
stphane> Unstable is really for making sure that we can make stphane> mistake. Because you could then work in the alpha image.
Making a mistake doesn't imply going back in time. A mistake can be fixed by going forward, even if it takes more time.
stphane> Please continue to clean and review bug fixes because squeak stphane> needs that.
I simply won't be able to (time resources cannot be extended) as long as past updates can be removed from the unstable stream. I've explained why in length.
I think we could/should agree on that a rollback of a cs in the unstable stream should be the very last option to get out of a jam eg. a update that screw up seriously. People comitting to be part of unstable should be credited for their comitment and we should not pull the carpet under their feet at every twist and turn. We need people working for enhancing Squeak and we need to value their time and effort.
Ommitting the bad updates and their revert should be easy when the unstable updates are moved over to stable
Karl