But hilaire the closure got integrated so now they are in. I think that third party tools should have a look and try and report problems. Stef On May 11, 2009, at 6:17 PM, Hilaire Fernandes wrote:
I don't know how well tested/stable could be the closure change (expecially with third party packages as seaside, Magma or other DB backend) but if unsure it may be wise to keep it for a latter release, people may want first stability for a 1.0 to start productivity project with.
Hilaire
2009/5/11 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr>
Hi guys
Here are the discussions we forgot to get on the list :)
I was thinking that I would not do the license cleaning for 1.0
Yes, I agree. We can do this in 1.1, which can follow shortly after 1.0. Any objections from Marcus, Mike?
What is the status of "Main EToys removal, reorganize MorphicExtras-"? Do you plan to do more for 1.0?
Apart from that we have left on our list (http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/Milestones ):
- default in-image font(s) - Package management system with stable and unstable distributions - Remove SqueakMap and Installer from core
- All tests green - Clean up package and class category organization - Pharo one-click image (including developer tools, GettingStarted information, screenshots, ...) - New sources file
Are we going to integrate the new preference system/browser in 1.0?
Now we are waiting for eliot closures changes.
What kind of changes are theses? Did he say something about when they will be ready?
Stef
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- http://blog.ofset.org/hilaire _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project