I am also satisfied with the release mechanism, but I'm working on small apps. If something goes wrong it's not the end of the world for me right now. But I think there are at least 2 reasons why this issue should be taken seriously. One is that the word "Enterprise" must be taken seriously (it was a source of criticism of web2py). And things like this is *one* contributing factor to whether or not this word "Enterprise" means something. Second reason is that while the current release mechanism is acceptable, if web2py grows and more people use web2py to develop critical apps, things like this inevitably becomes important.
I think there is no need for a complex release mechanism. I think a simple mechanism can be effective and sufficient. For one thing, I don't think the 2-button suggestion is a good idea; it's just another indirect layer of information that might not be meaningful if the underlying mechanism is meaningful. Conversely, if the underlying mechanism is meaningful, there's no need for the 2- button solution. For example, if the release mechanism follows strictly Massimo's rule that 1.x.0 is likely a feature-introducing "big release" with potential big bugs, where as 1.x.9 is likely a bug- fixing release, then users can make intelligent decision to upgrade or not; so there's no need for 2 buttons. If this rule is not adhered as intended, however, then 2 buttons do not help. ONE SPECIFIC SUGGESTION I HAVE IS THIS: One upgrade button is fine, but in addition to that, there should be a summary Change Log, so users can preview the changes. This together with the current rule for release (as described by Massimo) should be sufficient for developers to make well-informed decision to upgrade or to wait.
