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
|