From: "Doug Way" <dway at riskmetrics.com>
> Sorry, I should have used better wording to express this.  "Critical" or
> perhaps "urgent" would better describe the kind of bug I was talking
> about, rather than "major".
>
> I would still maintain that these two rules are in effect, then:
>
> 1. Any bug which has been around for more than a year is not a
> critical/urgent bug, simply by virtue of it having been around for more
> than a year.
> 2. Only fixes for critical/urgent bugs will be considered for addition
> to an already-released "final" image, or a gamma image.
>
> Note that rule #2 ONLY applies to gamma/final images... we consider all
> kinds of non-urgent bugfixes during the earlier alpha/beta stages of a
> release.  I was hoping I made that clear when I said "we should
> certainly consider the fix for 3.7alpha".

All of that makes sense to me, now that I am starting to understand more
about the Squeak bug-fixing process/release cycle. Thanks for helping to
make it clearer.

> In other words, it's just a matter of when your fix can be considered in
> the release cycle, not whether it would be considered at all.

Of course I understand. It's a shame I didn't understand all this a week ago
(assuming that my fix is in fact correct ;-)).

Cheers,

Peter van Rooijen
Amsterdam

> I can agree with the gist of the rest of your post.
>
> - Doug