Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!apple!bloom-beacon!bu-cs!dartvax!eleazar.dartmouth.edu!mjm
From: mjm@eleazar.dartmouth.edu (Michael McClennen)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.hypercard
Subject: Re: Latest version (Re: Hypercard stack structure? Corrupted Stack.)
Message-ID: <16118@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU>
Date: 13 Oct 89 15:05:52 GMT
References: <35588@apple.Apple.COM>
Sender: news@dartvax.Dartmouth.EDU
Reply-To: mjm@dartmouth.edu (Michael McClennen)
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
Lines: 17

In article <35588@apple.Apple.COM> stadler@Apple.COM (Andy Stadler) writes:
>I wish it were that easy.  However, putting out a release is *quite a bit*
>more complicated than compiling a disk and sending it to someone.  Must go
>through test cycles, licensing, duplication, packaging, marketing, etc, etc.
>
>Now, as to why does 1.2.5 require 6.0.4:  The main reason for the 1.2.5
>release was for compatibility with the Macintosh Portable and the Macintosh
>IIci.  Both of these machines require 6.0.4.  The bug fixes were incidentals.

I understand why you did it that way, I just wish you hadn't.  The situation
you have now produced is one where 95% of the machines out there will not be
able to run Hypercard stacks over 8,000 cards without risk of corrupting them.
This seems to me like a rather serious bug in Hypercard, and one which should
have been fixed separately from the new machines upgrade.

Michael McClennen (mjm@dartmouth.edu)
Dartmouth College Academic Computing