Hi
On 8 Jan 2004, at 19:23, Mark Mackay - Orcon wrote:
Rapid development sounds good, but it would also be nice to have a set
of
target milestones so that people can know what's coming out and approx
when.
It would of course be necessary to do more planning with regard to
milestones, feature sets etc. I agree on that.
I guess the one thing that stands out to me which worries me a bit is
schema
changes, and even the addition of new tables, etc. The change for v1.x
->
2.0 is not likely to be a trivial one for me. I'm currently sitting on
about
110G of mail and I know the changeover is going to be 'fun'. A
once-every-so-often schema change is fine, but if you have to do it
every
1-2 months just to keep current with the current version, then it
starts
becoming a bit of an admin burden. This is especially true if security
patches are not applied to the previous versions (e.g if working on
2.4 and
2.2, 2.3 are not patched, etc).
Security fixes should always be applief to old versions (up to some
point, of course).
There probably needs to be a better way to track schema changes and
updates
to databsae required between versions. A "What's changed between v1.2
and
2.0" and "What's changed between v2.0 and 2.1" doc; which lists the
SQL/scripts that need to be run to upgrade things and the schema
changes
made.
Of course if you can avoid schema changes to more major versions 2.0,
2.5,
3.0, etc -- even better.
Agreed
Maybe a project plan would help here - and the schema could be set up
with
the necessary fields.
Agreed
Don't let the above rain on the development parade :) Just pointing
out some
of the concerns from my end relating to the 'cost' of upgrades.
Ilja
--
IC&S
Stadhouderslaan 57
3583 JD Utrecht
telnr. 030-6355730
faxnr. 030-6355731
PGP-key:
http://www.ic-s.nl/keys/ilja.txt
