Squeak Release Roadmap? (Was:Re: [squeak-dev] Notes from Release Team meeting 2)

>
>
>
>  El 3/4/08 12:24 PM, "Matthew Fulmer" <[hidden email]> escribió:
>
>
>  > The last "Release Team" meeting happened last Monday, 25
>  > February. I summarized the results of the meeting at
>  > http://installer.pbwiki.org/MeetingNotes002
>  >
>  > Based on the results, I started an agenda for the next meeting,
>  > which is not yet scheduled:
>  > http://installer.pbwiki.org/MeetingNotes003
>  >
>  > If you have questions about the release team, or want to discuss
>  > something, add an item to the agenda and come to the next
>  > meeting. You can either add them directly to the page, or email
>  > me, and I'll add them to the page
>  >
>  > --
>  > Matthew Fulmer -- http://mtfulmer.wordpress.com/
>  > Help improve Squeak Documentation: http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/808
>
>
> Matthew:
>
>  I thanks you organizational efforts.
>
>  Slowly I reading all mails for I don't miss some important.
>
>  Maybe we could use current v3dot10 reduced list or ask to web team for a new
>  "future Squeak" discussion list, for advance in clarify all ideas ?
>
>  I wish start 3.11, following previous ideas.
>
>  Seems a shorter goal and a more compatible one with actual Squeak.
>
>
>  Edgar
>
>
>
>
>

>
>
>
>  El 3/20/08 1:29 AM, "Igor Stasenko" <[hidden email]> escribió:
>
>
>  > What about making a more formal approach concerning next release?
>  It would be
>  > very useful to have a roadmap, what features we want in
>  next release.
>  We can
>  > divide things/initiatives onto subprojects and place this on a
>  web page. This
>  > will serve good both for historical and organizational
>  reasons.
>  This will help
>  > community (and newcomers) to be certain in what
>  direction we are moving and
>  > what most of us want to see in next
>  release.
>
>
> +1 for me.
>
>  I resume my view, for all could send feedback and we could collect
>  somewhere.
>
>  3.10 was the first release with some "package out" from previous 3.9 in
>  automatic and predictable way.
>
>  For this take the learning of Pavel with his Kernel and MinimalMorphic and
>  mine from SqueakLight.
>
>  Of course the list of people doing shrinking is  bigger , as I put in my old
>  pages about SqueakLight http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/3935
>
>  I wish going as close is possible towards MinimalMorphic, reshape current
>  Morphic (1.3 mb mcz) with my old "Ladrillos "
>  http://www.squeaksource.com/Ladrillos.html
>
>  I have the new ReleaseBuilderFor3dot11 class, as we have in the old days and
>  use again in 3dot10.
>
>  So this class documents all shrinking and reorganization I propose.
>
>  I see in this days some propose having Smalltalk current cleanUp using the
>  Ramon Leon script as start point.
>
>  Being off line , I put a cleanupPhaseFinal in ReleaseBuilderFor3dot11  with
>  some things I was discovering in the shrinking process.
>
>  So , I was ready for cut the following from 3.10
>  'Tests' 'SMLoader' 'SMBase' 'SUnit' 'SUnitGUI' 'ScriptLoader' 'Universes'
>  'Installer' 'XML-Parser' 'BookMorphandFriends' 'EToys-StarSqueak'
>  'MorphicExtras-Demo' 'MorphicExtras-Components' 'EToys'
>
>  Still some more polish needed and agree with Pavel if this was the best
>  reorg and take all methods changes needed from MinimalMorphic or do the
>  needed ajustments.
>
>  For Squeak3.10.gamma.7159.image
>  Smalltalk size  1947
>
>  For MinimalMorphic.19
>  Smalltalk size   1278
>
>  For "tentative" Squeak 3.11
>  Smalltalk size 1495
>
>  And we have Flaps and could load and unload projects.
>
>  So I think this was a good nine months target for polishing all and trying
>  DeltaStreams / Monticello2 as update mechanism
>
>
>  Edgar
>
>
>