For Pharo 1.0 it is clear that it does not include O2. For Pharo 1.1 we can consider adding it again if it is stable and people express their interest in it.
So, Mariano, until we add O2 back into the main release, you don't need to mention it anymore as part of the release log. Of course, if there are new versions and fixes please mention them in a separate thread as it is good to communicate any progress of internal and external packages. Cheers, Adrian On Mar 24, 2010, at 14:15 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > Sorry. Want I wanted to ask is...for next Pharo releases, I do the same but > making clear O2 is not by default ? or I just don't say anything about O2 > in the release ? > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Alexandre Bergel <[email protected]>wrote: > >> I do not have a definite answer. I personally prefer O2 instead of OB. OB >> is more stable though, which is a big advantage. >> Maybe a pool will help the community to say its word on it? Whether it >> wants to see O2 included or not in Pharo 1.0. Like this, you will not have >> to make an arbitrary decision. just an idea. >> >> Cheers, >> Alexandre >> >> >> >> On 24 Mar 2010, at 08:49, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >> >>> >>> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Adrian Lienhard <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> Hi Mariano, >>> >>> I wonder why you mentioned O2 issues below because O2 is not in Pharo >>> anymore, isn't it? >>> >>> >>> Sorry Adrian. I forgot about this email. I answer to the mail as it has an >>> excellent question and my bad :) >>> >>> I put the O2 issues because: >>> >>> - I think it is a "official package that works on Pharo" even if we don't >>> know what a official package is. >>> - I have to create a version of the metacello configuration for O2 and I >>> wanted to put the issues in the "description" of the release >>> - The O2 issues were submitted in Pharo issue tracking, thus, I wanted to >>> put them as closed and put "integrated in PharoXXX" >>> - I changed the welcome workspace to load this new version of O2 >>> >>> However, it doesn't mean that O2 is now included in Dev images. Now you >>> made me realize that this can be confusing. So, what should I do ? I am all >>> ears :) >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Adrian >>> >>> On Mar 20, 2010, at 20:40 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>> >>>> Hi folks. We are proud to announce the (hopefully) last RC3 for Pharo >>> 1.0. >>>> >>>> This image is based in PharoCore-1.0-10515rc3. The image also contain >>> lot of >>>> fixes and improvements of external packages: >>>> >>>> These, are the fixed issues of the external tools: >>>> >>>> OB: Issues 1891, 1748, 1670, 1667, 1705, 1667 >>>> >>>> O2: issues 1887, 1312, 1429, 1886, 2073 >>>> >>>> New Inspector: issues 1783, 1499 >>>> >>>> Refactoring Browser: issue 2108 >>>> >>>> The link is: >>>> >>> https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/26680/Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1.zip >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Mariano >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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 >>> >> >> -- >> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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
