re: releasing SqueakMap, going forward

Hi Doug--

> Now that we're working toward 3.4, and we've decided that it should
> be finalized relatively soon, I suppose there wasn't a great need to
> split off 3.2.  Oh well. :-)  However, there were a lot of
> 3.2-compatible packages already in place on SqueakMap, so it seemed
> like SqueakMap should have some sort of debut in the 3.2 world.

	As I suggested at this month's OOPSLA Squeak BOF, I think the thing to
do is make 3.4 consist of just 3.2final plus SqueakMap. This would seem
to have negligible impact on registered packages; I think we could just
make confirmation of that part of the testing for 3.4. Then start on
3.5, with all the other changes floating around since the beginning of
development on the now-defunct 3.3.


-C

--
Craig Latta
improvisational musical informaticist
[email protected]
www.netjam.org/resume
Smalltalkers do: [:it | All with: Class, (And love: it)]