Hi Mike, On Oct 6, 2009, at 22:36 , Michael Roberts wrote:
> i would mark the decompiler tests as 1.1. I would also mark the > debugger highlight bug as 1.1. I think these are going to take time. I agree. Do you want to update the tracker? > then we have to review the sunits and see what is realistic to fix and > what is 'unknown'. I noticed that after the recent closure fixes there are a couple of new failures and errors. For instance AuthorTest>>#testDeprecatedSendsRemoved (I guess the reported senders of a selector changed with some closure changes). see http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/BaselineTestResults > For everything we don't understand mark and > comment #expectedFailures. what would be really helpful would be any > writeup on the issue tracker for analysis on sunit failures if folks > have time. ok. I think we should seriously check the remaining errors/failures before marking them. > I would like to see a few process things discussed > -how we maintain 1.0 stable branch > -how we maintain 1.1 alpha. i.e do we try out some other package meta > system? that could be worth some hacking at the start of the cycle to > see the mechanism. It is not something to mess around with when we get > near beta. We can use the current update stream as the 1.0 stable branch and create a new stream, maybe based on another mechanism, for 1.1 alpha. I think we should get all tests green and the remaining issues fixed before declaring a release candidate. There are also 3 OmniBrowser issues in the list and I wonder whether somebody plans to fix them? If we concentrate on these tasks in the next days and during the sprint, I am sure we are able to get a reasonable RC1 within the next 14 days. Cheers, Adrian > cheers, > Mike > > 2009/10/6 Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]>: >> >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >> From: [email protected] >> Date: October 6, 2009 8:47:09 PM GMT+02:00 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: next steps... to we create a release candidate and open a >> 1.1 >> alpha? >> >> You are not allowed to post to this mailing list, and your message >> has >> been automatically rejected. If you think that your messages are >> being rejected in error, contact the mailing list owner at >> [email protected]. >> >> >> From: stephane ducasse <[email protected]> >> Date: October 6, 2009 8:47:04 PM GMT+02:00 >> To: Pharo Development <[email protected]> >> Subject: next steps... to we create a release candidate and open a >> 1.1 >> alpha? >> >> >> Hi guys >> >> I would like to know what are the important bugs or fixes to be >> integrated >> that cannot wait for 1.1. >> And it would be nice to tag a release candidate (really soon now). >> >> We get a pharo sprint the 17 and I would like to get a lot of the >> pending >> fixes integrated >> since then and that people can kill some problems on 1.1 >> >> Stef >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
