Release list: delete or not?

Hi all. I notice you guys seem not to want to use the mailing
list I set up a while ago for the release team. Is that the
case? I just got this email and need to know whether to let the
list expire or not.

----- Forwarded message from Nabble <[hidden email]> -----

From: Nabble <[hidden email]>
To: [hidden email]
Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:44:37 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Nabble forum scheduled for deletion


Dear Nabble user:

Your forum "Squeak - Release" has been inactive for 120 days, so it has been scheduled for deletion in another 7 days.
To prevent this forum from being deleted, you can post a message to the forum or edit the forum.  The forum is here:

http://old.nabble.com/Squeak---Release-f32847.html

If you want to have this forum migrated to the new Nabble2 system, please contact Nabble Support:
http://n2.nabble.com/Nabble-Support-f1.html

The differences between the old and new systems are described here:
http://n2.nabble.com/Differences-between-Nabble1-and-Nabble2-tp3925029p3925029.html

Regards,
Nabble Support



----- End forwarded message -----

--
Matthew Fulmer (a.k.a. Tapple)

I say nuke  it. Release process wants more transparency.

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 9:32 AM, Matthew Fulmer <[hidden email]> wrote:


--
Casey Ransberger

> I say nuke  it. Release process wants more transparency.


It took us years to get it. We used to have a separate list for each  
release, then wegot release then the admins kept switching it all back  
to the old.

Please take this trunk noise elsewhere.

Keith

On 3/11/10 3:32 PM, "Matthew Fulmer" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi all. I notice you guys seem not to want to use the mailing
> list I set up a while ago for the release team. Is that the
> case? I just got this email and need to know whether to let the
> list expire or not.

Odd false statement.
The official is [hidden email]  , exist before you come
and go without deliver any.
People now say is the worst idea ever .

2010/3/11 Matthew Fulmer <[hidden email]>:
> Dear Nabble user:
>
> Your forum "Squeak - Release" has been inactive for 120 days, so it has been scheduled for deletion in another 7 days.

It doesn't make much sense to keep this list if completely unused. Delete.

Ian.
--
http://mecenia.blogspot.com/

On 3/11/10 3:38 PM, "Casey Ransberger" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I say nuke  it. Release process wants more transparency.
Not in the terms some see a Release process.

Keith, this is task for Bob the Builder and not for a old guy who don't see
the world from a place with tele.

Edgar

Casey Ransberger wrote:
> I say nuke  it. Release process wants more transparency.

I am all with you. We have tons of lists we probably not need.

regards, Göran

On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 12:32:18PM -0500, Matthew Fulmer wrote:
Hmm. Looks like Edgar sent an email to the release list between
the time this email was sent and I noticed it. So the Nabble
archive will be around for at least 120 more days

--
Matthew Fulmer (a.k.a. Tapple)

At 2:17 PM -0500 3/11/10, Matthew Fulmer apparently wrote:
I say keep it and use it.
Everything comes to my email inbox anyway but for those that don't want to follow the detail, it would be good to have separated on the release list.

Ken G. Brown

On 3/11/10 5:21 PM, "Ken G. Brown" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I say keep it and use it.
> Everything comes to my email inbox anyway but for those that don't want to
> follow the detail, it would be good to have separated on the release list.
>
> Ken G. Brown
You and Keith was right.
I plan use it

Hi Edgar -

On 3/11/2010 10:31 AM, Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:
> On 3/11/10 3:38 PM, "Casey Ransberger"<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>> I say nuke  it. Release process wants more transparency.
> Not in the terms some see a Release process.

Can you perhaps say a few words of what you're envisioning the release
process to be? Perhaps something along the lines that I started with
listing the tasks that you're imagining to do and how to organize them.

I'm starting to wonder a little if we aren't talking past each other in
these discussions.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

On 3/11/10 6:09 PM, "Andreas Raab" <[hidden email]> wrote:
I follow your schedule, not fear.
All you put I agree, as I said.
But if we was serious about modularization we need a different way.

I send a first different as usual and only Igor say yes until now.
We could discuss all step by step.
I wish 'fork' as few as possible.

You think having a two ways process , plain old .cs from some server and
regular trunk is good or no ?

Because if the answer is yes, I need a procedure which is different as now.

You think experiments with SqueakCore, letting me prove the thing is more as
some videos is good or not ?

Because if the answer is yes, I need a procedure which is different as now.

Bert says I must wear two hats and is right.

The main release for 4.1 is your mail, no question about and no weird things
for it.

But 4.2 should be SqueakCore and we could start now for polish all.

I think in 9 months have a baby for show you at your satisfaction in ESUG
Barcelona...

Cheers and I stick to people consensus.

Edgar

Hi Edgar,

> I follow your schedule, not fear.
> All you put I agree, as I said.
> But if we was serious about modularization we need a different way.

Amen brother, preach it !!!

> I send a first different as usual and only Igor say yes until now.
> We could discuss all step by step.
> I wish 'fork' as few as possible.

I agree too. We do not really need more than one good kernel. The  
question is where is it?

> You think having a two ways process , plain old .cs from some server  
> and
> regular trunk is good or no ?

I am using plain old cs, it is great.

Actually my cs are not quite so plain and old because I have factored  
out the fileIn/fileOut code so as not to be restricted to the existing  
format constraints.

> Because if the answer is yes, I need a procedure which is different  
> as now.

> But 4.2 should be SqueakCore and we could start now for polish all.

Agreed, I think I might have a process you may like. It is like the  
update stream, except you can have more than one stream.

Keith

2010/3/11 keith <[hidden email]>:  aaajajajajajjaaaaaaaaaaaa

Relax people, relax.