Igor said:
What i really want to point out, that release process were not fair to others, when there only single person deciding whether put fix/feature into release or not.
I have to disagree with you here, although I can see how this is perceived and comes down as always to a communication break down. The fixes applied to each release did not generally come from out of thin air. They originated as reports on bugs.squeak.org, generally from someone other than the harvester. So immediately you have the opinion of at least one other person in support of harvesting the fix/enh. And I think if you look through the list of issues harvested for 3.10 you will find that in most cases weeks or even months went by when everyone had an opportunity to review and comment on submitted fixes. In many cases this did happen. I would really really like for it to happen more.
Of course mistakes were still made. I made more than a few myself. I think you will even find issues where I made the report and harvested it myself without any additional comment.
In support of 3.11 I have to say the situation is slightly better here because Keith and I have worked together to come up with a solution that clearly marks which issues are targeted for each release and the current status. The initial impetus here was purely technical, a way for the build system to automatically harvest issues. But it serves as well to flag issues that concerned Squeakizens (Squeak citizens, yes I know I should have resisted) should pay particular attention to.
Andreas' instructions
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2009-February/134095....
may help clarify.
Ken