As of today, What does "3.9" mean?

Martin Wirblat sql.mawi at t-link.de
Thu Mar 10 21:35:31 UTC 2005


Cees de Groot wrote:
....
> - Object format changes seem to be waiting at the doorstep;
> - If Morphic splitters, modules, packages teams deliver, there are 
> going  to be some major changes (maybe some of them not entirely  
> backwards-compatible - would be nice to signal that with a major 
> version  number);
.....
> Anyway, if it is not a good idea, we'll just call it 3.10. However, I  
> think there are some good reasons to call it 4.0 and I can't really 
> find  any arguments against it (so please help me ;)).
 >
Here is completely different idea - I am not going to call it help ;)

We could skip version 3.9 entirely and jump directly to 4.0 *without* 
any other big changes than those to the object format. So no Morphic 
changes, modules, Tweak, Traits...

Basically 4.0 would be a 3.8 with a new image format.

Why?

This way we would get a version that is more backward compatible 
library-wise and at the same time forward compatible for VM changes of 
the future.

More and more I have the impression that many people are hoping or 
planning for a stabilizing 3.8 as a starting point or a last resort. If 
the image format changes get applied too late, people using older stuff 
are locked out from the factor-10-VM of the future ;)

Anyway, I think it would be useful to have such a bridging version.

regards,
Martin






More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list