Michael Rueger wrote:

> Doug Way wrote:
>
>> 2. Replace the 9 network rewrite changesets with 1 combined changeset 
>> and 8 dummy changesets as Joshua suggested.  This would fix the 
>
>
> That would be the safest one.
>
>> problem.  (Assuming there are no order dependencies in the changesets, 
>
>
> There *are* order dependencies, especially with the remove and 
> recompile change sets.


Okay, I will just combine them together, then.  I guess I just literally 
concatenate them in order, leaving out the 'From Squeak3.6alpha ...' 
timestamps.  (Or does it not matter if they're left in?)  I'll overwrite 
update 5252 with that, and then replace the other 7 updates with empty ones.

>> which I think is the case.)  However, this has the slightly 
>> unsettling effect that some 3.6alpha users will have different 
>> changeset contents than others.  Although the resulting source code 
>> in the image should be the same, so it's not really a big deal.  Or,
>
>
> I don't think it's a big deal, only a tiny fraction of people would 
> even closely look at single change set.
>
> By doing this we could then also announce an "all clear to update" for 
> people like Jimmie who have been hesitant to update.


Yep, I'll do this too.

- Doug Way