On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 7:18 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.den...@inria.fr>wrote:
> > On Apr 3, 2011, at 7:13 PM, laurent laffont wrote: > > Hi, > > as I'm a little lost on Pharo 1.2 (1.2.1 full was announced but I haven't > seen 1.2.0, no big party, no 1 million download contest, BBC announcement... > :) I wonder how we can improve the process for 1.3. > > Yes, that is why I did not want to decouple the release of Core from Full. > Because is drags out the release so far that we can not announce it > > But we could not, as people (inkluding those maintaining packages of Full) > only look at released core images... > And so I did a Core 1.2. And people looked at it. Finally. So I did a > 1.2.1, and only after releasing that, people looked at it, so I even started > a 1.2.2 today.. and now I am dead. > Time for a big real good fresh beer ;) I'm thinking about: > - not starting Pharo 1.4 too soon as I feel it will steal energy from Pharo > 1.3. > - freezing early to have shorter release and have less stuff to fix with > maximum energy (it seems energy go down quickly in the fixing period) > - a failing test should be highest priority: it's easier to fix a broken > feature/test as soon as it appears > - one guy should drive the release (I feel that Mariano did this for Pharo > 1.1 and we know who we should talk to). > > > - Get rid of the Core/Full image destinction. This does not work. And I > will not do a release with having two images again... it never worked, and > it will never work. > Yes, 2 images seems hard to maintain and hard to understand for newcomers. May be we can have: - Metacello configurations tested separately in Pharo-Clients in Hudson (like PetitParser, Seaside, ...) - drop the ones that don't have tests - drop actual Pharo, rename PharoCore => Pharo. - GUI tool in Pharo to easy load Metacello configurations (some stuff must be easy to load for newbies, especially help) Laurent. Marcus > > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > >
