Using 3.10.2-build in Release 4.1

> > >>>>> "Ken" == Ken G Brown <[hidden email]> writes:
> >
> >Ken> You had at least two available starting points, 3.10.2 and 3.10.2-build,
> >Ken> -buiild was clearly better and available since June 28, 2009 (before
> >Ken> trunk).  The fixes and additions to 3.10.2 in -build were clearly
> >Ken> documented in the info file on the ftp site,
> >Ken> Squeak3.10.2-build/090628-1523/090628-1523_Squeak3.10.2-build.info.  And
>Ken> you all are choosing the one that was inferior as a starting point.
> >
> >I think I could find at least a dozen squeak developers here who
> >would agree with me that if 3.10.2-build was a fixed point, it's
> >a bad name for a release, and if it was a moving point, it would
> >be a bad place to start the legal process.
> >
> >Had that been released as 3.10.3, or 3.11, your point would have merit.

>> > >>>>> "Ken" == Ken G Brown <[hidden email]> writes:
>> >
>> >Ken> You had at least two available starting points, 3.10.2 and 3.10.2-build,
>> >Ken> -buiild was clearly better and available since June 28, 2009 (before
>> >Ken> trunk).  The fixes and additions to 3.10.2 in -build were clearly
>> >Ken> documented in the info file on the ftp site,
>> >Ken> Squeak3.10.2-build/090628-1523/090628-1523_Squeak3.10.2-build.info.  And
>>Ken> you all are choosing the one that was inferior as a starting point.
>> >
>> >I think I could find at least a dozen squeak developers here who
>> >would agree with me that if 3.10.2-build was a fixed point, it's
>> >a bad name for a release, and if it was a moving point, it would
>> >be a bad place to start the legal process.
>> >
>> >Had that been released as 3.10.3, or 3.11, your point would have merit.
>
> I agree that for 4.0  it is too late to use  3.10.2-build.
> However, would it be possible to apply trunk to  3.10.2-build instead of
> 3.10.2  for  4.1?  and thus harvest the value in 3.10.2-build?
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Ralph Boland
>
>

>>>>>>>> "Ken" == Ken G Brown <[hidden email]> writes:
>>>
>>> Ken> You had at least two available starting points, 3.10.2 and 3.10.2-build,
>>> Ken> -buiild was clearly better and available since June 28, 2009 (before
>>> Ken> trunk).  The fixes and additions to 3.10.2 in -build were clearly
>>> Ken> documented in the info file on the ftp site,
>>> Ken> Squeak3.10.2-build/090628-1523/090628-1523_Squeak3.10.2-build.info.  And
>> Ken> you all are choosing the one that was inferior as a starting point.
>>>
>>> I think I could find at least a dozen squeak developers here who
>>> would agree with me that if 3.10.2-build was a fixed point, it's
>>> a bad name for a release, and if it was a moving point, it would
>>> be a bad place to start the legal process.
>>>
>>> Had that been released as 3.10.3, or 3.11, your point would have merit.
>
> I agree that for 4.0  it is too late to use  3.10.2-build.
> However, would it be possible to apply trunk to  3.10.2-build instead of
> 3.10.2  for  4.1?  and thus harvest the value in 3.10.2-build?

> On 15.03.2010, at 06:06, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Ralph Boland wrote:
>>> I agree that for 4.0  it is too late to use  3.10.2-build.
>>> However, would it be possible to apply trunk to  3.10.2-build instead of
>>> 3.10.2  for  4.1?  and thus harvest the value in 3.10.2-build?
>>
>> Hardly. 3.10.2-build has MC1.5 which cannot load all the packages from the repository. AFAIK we have all but one fix from 3.10.2-build and that fix is just an enhancement of SystemVersion.
>
> Since we will need to rebase trunk on 4.0 anyway, that might be a good time to upgrade MC? That is:
>
> 1) start with 4.0 image
> 2) load better MC (1.5 + fixes and additions necessary to make trunk updating work)
> 3) try updating from trunk
> 4) if updating breaks, add more fixes to MC 1.5, go to step 1.
> 5) done.
>
> - Bert -
>

>
> 2010/3/15 Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]>:
>> On 15.03.2010, at 06:06, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
>>>
>>> On Sun, 14 Mar 2010, Ralph Boland wrote:
>>>> I agree that for 4.0  it is too late to use  3.10.2-build.
>>>> However, would it be possible to apply trunk to  3.10.2-build instead of
>>>> 3.10.2  for  4.1?  and thus harvest the value in 3.10.2-build?
>>>
>>> Hardly. 3.10.2-build has MC1.5 which cannot load all the packages from the repository. AFAIK we have all but one fix from 3.10.2-build and that fix is just an enhancement of SystemVersion.
>>
>> Since we will need to rebase trunk on 4.0 anyway, that might be a good time to upgrade MC? That is:
>>
>> 1) start with 4.0 image
>> 2) load better MC (1.5 + fixes and additions necessary to make trunk updating work)
>> 3) try updating from trunk
>> 4) if updating breaks, add more fixes to MC 1.5, go to step 1.
>> 5) done.
>>
>> - Bert -
>>
>
> If it's doable in reasonnable time and has some technical support, why not.
> Since MC itself has been patched during trunk process, that also
> deserve some care.
>
> Nicolas