We use Pharo as a development environment and we run a business. So, for us stability and an LTS version makes sense.
I think there should be a compromise. The Ubuntu LTS model is a compromise in a sense because the releases between the LTS versions include the newer / more experimental stuff.
From what I understand, the fork of Pharo from Squeak was intended to provide more stability and make Pharo an environment that businesses like us could use. This means that there must be a reasonable degree of stability in Pharo. I also understand that the goal was to get to a minimal Pharo and build up by loading what you need on top of that. And other reasons.
Our experience was that Pharo 2 was quite stable, Pharo 3 was even better. We lived on Pharo 3 for a very long time. Pharo 4 broke, 5 was better and we're now on 6.1. None of these are as good as Pharo 3 was from a stability point��of view.
I understand the innovation dilemma and wish there was a clean answer, but believe we need both.
I wish I could get a tiny gap to work on Pharo itself and not have this relentless focus on survival in the business. I thank you all for your hard work on Pharo.
