We can't actually remove the package system, but we can leave it as "beta" in v5.3.2 --- and in that case, v5.3.2 becomes the broader test process for the package system.
At Tue, 8 Jan 2013 09:31:52 -0500, Matthias Felleisen wrote: > > I know it is probably too late for that but can we release this one as 5.3.2 > w/o the package system and do so quickly? > > > > > On Jan 8, 2013, at 9:07 AM, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > > > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 8:58 AM, Matthew Flatt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> At Tue, 8 Jan 2013 08:51:03 -0500, Sam Tobin-Hochstadt wrote: > >>> On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 12:20 AM, Ryan Culpepper <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Please tell me if you think that this release is significant enough > >>>> that it should be announced on the users list for wider testing. > >>> > >>> I think the new package system (yay Jay!) is significant enough that > >>> it should get wide testing, and that it merits the release number 5.4. > >> > >> +1 on v5.4. > >> > >> I'm not sure about wider testing, because I think it will take time to > >> build up enough packages to make testing interesting. > > > > I think some wider testing can still be useful. For example, does > > sytem-wide/installation-wide/user-specific package installation work > > on all flavors of Windows/Linux/OSX that we support. > > > > Another issue, which perhaps Jay has more insight into -- are we > > planning to move the PNS to racket-lang.org prior to the release? > > > > Sam > > _________________________ > > Racket Developers list: > > http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > [application/pkcs7-signature "smime.p7s"] [~/Desktop & open] [~/Temp & open] _________________________ Racket Developers list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/dev
