On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 10:22 AM, Torsten Bergmann <astares@gmx.de> 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 Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project