>> But now we should go beta=releaseCandidate1 >> >> >No, I don't agree. That's not the same. One thing is beta and another thing >is a release candidate.
While I appreciate that Stef wants to push out 1.1. quickly since there are so many good things in this release we should clearly start to build a beta, test it and then (based on these results) have a first release candidate. Pharo core is stable - but is pharo-dev already? We really should have a beta. We all know: Pharo = core + packages >Imagine you are going to download a software which is in RELEASE CANDIDATE >and has a lot of problems and bugs....is not good for marketing. especially if the website says: "Pharo is an attractive platform to build and deploy mission critical Smalltalk applications." So +1 for Mariano here Mariano: what is the state of building a dev image from the core for 1.1.? Last time I tried the ConfigurationOfPharo with 1.1. I run into the condense changes problem - which I thing was fixed now. Thx T. -- GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT! Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01 _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
