Adam's cleanup...

goran.krampe at bluefish.se goran.krampe at bluefish.se
Mon Feb 23 19:46:13 UTC 2004


Doug Way <dway at mailcan.com> wrote:
> goran.krampe at bluefish.se wrote:
> 
> >Hi Doug and all!
> >
> >As you might have seen I am slowly working my way through Adam's
> >cleanup.sar.
> >I have no idea how long it will take.
> >
> >I have submitted the first .cs intended for the update stream -
> >SoundSystemCleanup-gk, and I will call all these BlaBlaCleanup-gk. That
> >one covers the first (alphabetically) 2 changesets inside Cleanup.sar
> >and they have been extensively refined :) including fixing bitrot and
> >adding class comments etc.

Will post a new one btw, did get some feedback from Ken on it.

> >Of course, it needs testing!!! :) - I haven't even tried filing it into
> >a clean 3.7alpha yet.
> >
> >Anyway, I am a little curious about alpha->beta etc. since Cleanup.sar
> >contains reorganisations and refactorings that typically aren't beta
> >stuff, but rather alpha.
> 
> Right, these sorts of cleanups (splitting off packages) should happen 
> during alpha, not beta.
> 
> The beta release date has gotten pushed back a couple of times as we try 
> to get near the end of our "to-do" list for 3.7.  Currently, since 
> there's not a huge amount left to do, I'd say we should shoot for a week 
> from this Friday to move to beta, which would be March 5th.

Sounds good to me. It might be good to repost that single statement with
a clear subject so that all people rush to their BFAVs and help out. :)

> We could try to get in as many of Adam's cleanups as possible before 
> then, but it's probably not critical if we don't get them all in...?

I agree. Lets do it that way.

> Then, once we move to beta, we'll remain in beta for 6 weeks of just bug 
> fixes so things can stabilize.  (At the end of that time, 3.8alpha would 
> be opened.  Or possibly it could be opened in the middle of that time.  
> But we do want to have at least some period of only 3.7beta being 
> available to enforce testing.  And there's also the perennial issue of 
> whether the next release will be called 3.8 or 4.0...)

Sounds fine. The 3.8 vs 4.0 is IMHO dependent on if we are going for an
image format change or not. If I understand Craig correctly he doesn't
think Squat will be game until a bit later.
 
> - Doug

regards, Göran



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list