Stef, I think you misunderstood me. I didn't imply that we need to fix the 179 issues for 1.1. But what we should really do is to identify whether there is any show stopper. I started going through the 1.1-tagged issues yesterday and I have moved stuff that is not critical to 1.2 (or close what doesn't need any further action). Maybe it would be better not to tag issues with 1.2 unless we know that we want to take them into account for 1.2. Else we end up being in the same situation as now.
Also, people who know there is something that really needs to be fixed for a 1.1 release should speak up now. Cheers, Adrian On Jun 9, 2010, at 08:03 , Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > > On Jun 8, 2010, at 8:53 PM, Adrian Lienhard wrote: > >> I think it's a bad idea to just switch the downloads from 1.0 to 1.1 now. We >> don't even have a release candidate yet, hence 1.1 hasn't seen much testing. >> 1.1 may be ok for personal use but is it also safe to be deployed on a >> mission critical system? I'm all for short release cycles, but please don't >> take such shortcuts. A high quality is really important if we want to >> support the companies using Pharo and attract new ones. > > We can keep 1.0 download but we will issue 1.1 rc now. > >> So the next steps should be: identifying the critical issues (currently >> there are 179 open issues tagged 1.1!), then fixing them, then we do a first >> RC. > We will not fix all these issues but moved them to 1.2. > Since most of them exit in 1.0 and you can work with them I do not see why > suddenly we should fix them in 1.1 especially > just before the release. So stability also means that you should not change > the system at wrong moment. > And now this is not the moment to change it. > > Stef > > >> Cheers, >> Adrian >> >> On Jun 8, 2010, at 15:45 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 9:46 AM, Niko Schwarz >>> <[email protected]>wrote: >>> >>>> Of course not. Just switch the default download (the big one, all over >>>> the site) site to 1.1. >>>> >>>> I just suggest to switch from 1.0 to 1.1 as stable at the same time >>>> that we switch from 1.1 to 1.2 for development. >>> >>> >>> I think this is a good idea. >>> >>> >>>> Then we never have 3 >>>> "current" versions at once. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> Niko >>>> >>>> -- >>>> http://scg.unibe.ch/staff/Schwarz >>>> twitter.com/nes1983 >>>> Tel: +41 076 235 8683 >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> 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
