>> 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 f�r 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