realbasic-nug
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: RB Release Cycle Stability issues - A suggestion:-

To: REALbasic NUG <realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com>
Subject: Re: RB Release Cycle Stability issues - A suggestion:-
From: Norman Palardy <npalardy at great-white-software dot com>
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2006 14:29:28 -0700
Delivered-to: listarchive at realsoftware dot com
Delivered-to: realbasic-nug at lists dot realsoftware dot com
References: <001d01c6fd19$dd2b9af0$6501a8c0 at lynn>

On Oct 31, 2006, at 11:24 AM, Lynn Fredricks wrote:

But if the schedule becomes the sole metric, then it drives you to cut out the more intensive issues/features or let them slide from one version to the
next because the cycle is just too short.

Actions speak louder than any words.
The most recent 2006r4 release just barely made it out under the pre- announced release schedule.
Judge for yourself what's more important.

I'm still a proponent of REAL using their criteria to select a number of bugs/enhancements to focus on, fix/implement them, make them rock solid and see there are no weird side effects and release that.

Many people still use 5.x as they consider that the last "rock solid" release and they have issues trying to move those old projects to new versions.
_______________________________________________
Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode:
<http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/>

Search the archives of this list here:
<http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>