On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 12:12 AM, Jacek Laskowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 7:32 AM, Donald Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > We need to continue supporting our user community and stop forcing them > > to the latest and greatest release. Look at how Tomcat and the HTTP > > Server handle support with tons of "." releases. I'm not saying we > > should have as many maintenance releases as Tomcat (ie. 5.5.26) but we > > should try to keep supporting a release by integrating patches for say > 6 > > months after the last maintenance release, which would mean we're still > > in the 2.0.x 6 months window (released 20071019.) > ... > > There are still users asking about 1.1.1 on the users mailing list, so > > obviously we need to do a better job of supporting our releases and > stop > > this "try the latest release" and "try the latest snapshot" approach > > that we have been doing. > > Well, it's an open source project and *I* don't have much time > supporting the latest and gratest release not to mention I won't > certainly have some for the past releases. > Of course it is open source and nobody is demanding anything from anyone :o). The aim of our releases > should always be to move forward without forgetting our past (and > hopefully support people who use the past releases). Think of it this > way - if we release 2.0.3, what would be a difference if we named it > 2.0.10 or 2.1.1? If a user needs to fix an issue and has to upgrade to > some version it doesn't really matter if it's 2.0.3, 2.0.58 or 2.1.1, > right? Migrating between major revisions is definitely more complex than migrating between minor revisions. With minor releases, it could be as simple as replacing a jar from the new release and making a few configuration changes to get the ball rolling. We may not add new features in minor releases, but we should definitely provide critical bug fixes. That's what I'm talking about. Let's convince our users (or > better yet let them know/believe) that moving with the latest and > greatest release is for "their better and calmer life". If an end user > has to move up (s)he will have to test it out before upgrade, right? > Does it really matter what version it will be if the latest one works? > I don't think so. I keep hearing from my customers they don't like the > latest release because it's not well baked and noone really knows what > to expect. I keep answering them, well perhaps it is not but believe > me your pain when something bad happens (after your app worked fine > during testing) will be lower than when you're stuck with the past > version which you can't fix or expect to be fixed soon. The discussion on this thread has turned into something that is totally irrelevant to my original question. May be we should continue this discussion on a new thread?? Someone, who can really give me some inputs on what is happening with this SESSIONS.ser, please respond. > > > Jacek > > -- > Jacek Laskowski > http://www.JacekLaskowski.pl >
