Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:
> My point is this.
> The update number is not only a commodity.
> If we have ...
>> Image: Squeak3.10.2 [latest update: #7179]
> Its unclear the point in the process the image is
> But if we got
>> Image: Squeak3.10.2 [latest update: #7234]

I see. And I agree. But I'll have to repeat what I said earlier: We need 
a workable solution to the problem. If anyone has an idea what we can do 
please propose it.

> When finish 3.10.2 ? What have us chained to such number?

Nothing. Really just that we'd have to decide whether the next version 
is going to be called 3.11 or 4.1 (i.e., 4.0 MIT/SFC + trunk). From my 
perspective the "trunk" nomenclature relates to work in progress; it can 
either be based on the last or the next version and does't make much 
difference.

If people feel we should move forward we can do this at any time. So 
shall we just call the current trunk 3.11 alpha? (and if we get to 4.0, 
i.e., complete the SFC process, we can simply abandon 3.11 and instead 
go straight to 4.1)

Does that sound like a plan?

Cheers,
   - Andreas