*About the Moose process*
I dont think the Pharo process and the Moose process compare.

The Pharo process is about integrating fixes from packages which are supposed to do one and only one thing, and do it well and is tested.

The Moose process is about developers making incremental changes to the code base so that they can work and share it immediately. Which means it can break other things.
Now I'm pretty sure I dont want a release every time someone commits a package in Moose, because I'm pretty sure this someone didn't run all the tests before committing. So making a release for each new commit makes no sense for me. We dont integrate changes, we just merge when there are some divergent branches. That's why we are always working with the dev version and the 'default' is one way to do it.

If we want historical data about Moose, I guess it's still possible to retrieve all latest packages at a given date. It will not be very different from what we used at this date.

Now about the *release* process for Moose: sure I would like that there will be more releases. Now as Doru said, when we do a release, we should do it for every sub projects and it's bit difficult with the current tools.
- One way to do automatically it is to use the test server to at least create a new version from the latest dev version and blessed it as 'tested' if 100% tests passed or 'broken'
But I dont want such versions to pollute the manual versions, which are supposed to be stronger. So something like create automatically 'testedVersionXXX' with tests or broken as possible blessing.
- Then we can do manual release from time to time (every two weeks, every months?), which requires more work as we have to do it for the different subprojects first, and blessed it as beta or stable.