May 30, 2010
9:39 p.m.
On 30.05.2010 23:17, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >> Hi! >> >> So much discussion about that little post... :) >> >> On 05/30/2010 10:10 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >>> Yes but in that case >>> try 1.0 >>> try 1.1 alpha >> Hmmm, Stephane still likes to top post I notice :) > I do not know what you are implying. But I think that we are trying to building a process for pharo > so this discussion is only about that: what are the expectations of people and what can we deliver > and if all these stuff make sense. > Conclusion > - we can only retrofit showstoppers fixes > - even good documentation of changes may not make people not failed but we can try something simple. > - short release cycles is a must and we are doing it now. > >> Anyway, Igor nailed it pretty good with his post actually - I was merely documenting "what I was trying to do and ended up doing". >> >> And one thing to note is that I should have tried 1.1. But... why didn't I? >> >> I am not sure the website can/should be different - but fact remains that I got "fooled" by the fact that 1.0 was just released and I really (stupid I know, but hey...) didn't think it was to be considered "outdated" already :) > Yes it really is. > Get the feel with 1.1. It is ***really*** better. Sort of like 4.0 and 4.1, although the gap is a bit smaller :) Cheers, Henry