Did I ask for support?
I asked to be able to continue to be able to continue to download older
versions of Pharo.
If you say no, then you say no.
If you intend to cutoff the downloads for older versions of Pharo, then
I would ask that you give me a couple of months warning.
If you say no, then you say no.
The original question was ... "Is anyone using zerconf for Pharo2.0" and
I answered your question...
I'm not sure that it costs you anything (other than goodwill) by
allowing folks to download older versions of Pharo ...
Supporting older versions of Pharo is another kettle of fish ...
Dale
On 3/23/15 9:20 AM, Marcus Denker wrote:
On 23 Mar 2015, at 17:16, Dale Henrichs <dale.henri...@gemtalksystems.com>
wrote:
I still have production code (GemTools) that runs today in Pharo 1.1 ...
I assume that others also have production code running in older versions of
Pharo and Squeak and GemStone so I make sure that Metacello continues to work
on those platforms ...
Not everyone has the luxury of having the time to port their entire production
catalog to the latest version of Pharo ...
I don't demand that zeroconf support Pharo1.2 as long as there is a way that I
can keep downloading Pharo1.2 ... but if you don't intend to support all
releases of Pharo on zeroconf, then I will simply start using the alternate
long term method in my scripts because I certainly don't want to have to change
scripts that are working perfectly fine, because you've decided to drop support
for a particular version….
Even Microsoft does not support ever old version of Windows. How can we?
Wouldn’t it get indefinitely expensive?
Marcus
