Hi all,
Having read many threads and thinking of a minimal consensus regarding 3.5. what about the following five points describing version 3.5
- It will include some important bug fixes - they will be hand picked and preferrably should have unit tests. - Easy to remove packages or packages for which we already have a removal script will be removed if maintainers/ stewards are found for them. - It will come out relatively soon. - It is aimed at testing release making activities to help to gain more information regarding future strategies and policies. - It should not differ too much from 3.4.
The discussion about specifics is ongoing. E.g. what does relatively soon mean (1,2,3,4 months?) Will MCP and KCP come in 3.6? Or partially already in 3.5? ....
What do you think?
-- Hannes
Hi,
Hi all,
Having read many threads and thinking of a minimal consensus regarding 3.5. what about the following five points describing version 3.5
- It will include some important bug fixes - they will be
hand picked and preferrably should have unit tests.
- Easy to remove packages or packages for which we
already have a removal script will be removed if maintainers/ stewards are found for them.
- It will come out relatively soon.
- It is aimed at testing release making activities to help
to gain more information regarding future strategies and policies.
- It should not differ too much from 3.4.
I agree.
The discussion about specifics is ongoing. E.g. what does relatively soon mean (1,2,3,4 months?) Will MCP and KCP come in 3.6? Or partially already in 3.5? ....
What do you think?
I think MCP and KCP have to be included as soon as possible. Faster we include them, faster we get bug reports, faster we fix them.
-- Hannes
Diego Gomez Deck
Hannes Hirzel wrote:
Having read many threads and thinking of a minimal consensus regarding 3.5. what about the following five points describing version 3.5
[...]
The discussion about specifics is ongoing.
Let us not forget to decide on a target for font replacement. We seemed close to a decision on what the next step should be, and a quick turn-around on this seems like a good idea in order to have something font-clean to present in license discussions with Apple.
-Jesse
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org