On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 6:21 PM, Adrian Lienhard <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, we don't use a "pre-alpha" tag [1] but start with alpha even > though the new features are not even being worked on. I think this > makes sense because we already have a running and working system. The > important distinctions between phases we need is alpha (i.e., > unstable, experimental and unfinished stuff can go in), beta (feature > complete but with known problems), RC, and then the final release. I > don't think we would gain anything with an additional tag. > > Yes, I agree with you it has no sense maybe to use the pre-alpha tag. However, I was wondering, not having any tag at this moment. When most of the work of 1.1 is done, then we tag alpha, then beta...etc. If I remember correctly, Pharo 1.0 at the very beginning didn't have a alpha tag ? only at the last months..but during the first year, I don't remember any tag, just Pharo core XXX version. Anyway, I don't want to discuss the life cycle. I just wanted to be sure it wasn't a mistake when putting the name to the zip. Best Mariano > Cheers, > Adrian > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Development_stage > On Nov 7, 2009, at 20:57 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 5:38 PM, Adrian Lienhard <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Yes, we have a 1.0 and a 1.1 stream now (actually since the sprint in > >> Lille). > >> > >> > > Yes I know that. > > > > > >> I'm integrating remaining critical fixes for 1.0, while Stef and the > >> other integrators have started working on 1.1. I don't think it's too > >> early at all. It allows us to keep the pace to move forward with new > >> stuff, while stabilizing and afterwards maintaining the 1.0 release. > >> > >> > > Yes, but this is done just with separating the streams in 1.0 and > > 1.1. What > > I don't know if it is ok is to put alpha to 1.1. > > > > I mean, when you tag something with alpha it means it is almost done > > and > > there are some bugs yet. But I think the job to be done for 1.1 is > > far more > > than just a couple of bugs. Maybe I wrong. > > > > But it sound strange to me to see a RC of one version and an alpha > > of the > > following at the same time. > > > > Cheers > > > > Mariano > > > > > >> Just as a reminder, here are the main goals we have set for 1.1: > >> > >> - New preferences system > >> - Integrate Alien > >> - Improve code quality (e.g., make selected Lint tests pass) > >> - Continuous integration system > >> > >> (http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/Milestones) > >> > >> Cheers, > >> Adrian > >> > >> On Nov 7, 2009, at 20:15 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > >> > >>> mmmmmmm are we already in 1.1 alpha ??? isn't it to early ? > >>> > >>> Best > >>> > >>> Mariano > >>> > >>> On Sat, Nov 7, 2009 at 2:26 PM, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >> > http://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/24734/PharoCore-1.1-11035-alpha.zip > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> 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 > >> > > _______________________________________________ > > 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
