Is pharo-minimal going to be an artefact of the Release? Should it be temporarily sacrificed to allow a more recent VM to go out with the Release?
If its too close to Release to change the VM, then perhaps the current release date could be a Release Candidate including a new VM, kept for maybe a two weeks with a hard rule for no updates except related to the new VM. I guess the creation of additional work and complexity for the Release, as well as risk updating the VM would be a consideration against. cheers -ben On Mon, Mar 23, 2015 at 9:05 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 23 Mar 2015, at 10:27, Norbert Hartl <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Am 23.03.2015 um 09:51 schrieb Noury Bouraqadi <[email protected]>: > > Hi, > > On http://pharo.org/download I got the Mac VM dating back to sept 2014. > Shouldn't it be http://files.pharo.org/vm/pharo/mac/latest.zip ? > > No, I think latest is more less a direct copy of the latest successful > build on jenkins. That would be a no-go to offer as the vm to use. VMs have > have releases as well. And in the same directory there is a stable.zip > which is the right one. And it is from september. Everything else is in the > hands of esteban. > > > this :) > > but seriously: I’ve been having some problems to promote a newer vm as > stable, concretely in the pharo-minimal step. I wanted to have new one for > Pharo4, but I’m not arriving either… so I will move it as soon as I find a > solution, I’m sorry :( > > Esteban > > > Norbert > > >
