On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Torsten Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> 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. > > It should load perfectly and work good. But try in latest core (at least 11360). And yes, the condenseChanges takes a life (a lot of time). So, don't kill the image. It is not freeze. Just take a beer and wait :) > 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
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
