Hi Olemis, The plan that has been discussed before was to migrate to an 0.8 instance. So we can make use of full multi-product support. I still think this is possible. Having multiple instances could cause some confusion in my opinion so I would look to avoid that if possible.
Cheers John On 6 November 2017 at 04:09, Olemis Lang <[email protected]> wrote: > On 11/5/17, Greg Stein <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sun, Nov 5, 2017 at 4:05 AM, John Chambers <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > [...] > > > >> My plan is to create a working 0.4 version of Bloodhound from this > backup > >> and then upgrade it to 0.8. > > > [...] > > What shall we do after we have a public instance ? Indeed I'd > recommend to have two instances, one with 0.4 (stable) and another > with 0.8, (testing) . > > p.s. I'm afraid I can't be of much help with the VMs but if there's > something else I can help with , let me know . > > -- > Regards, > > Olemis - @olemislc > > Apache™ Bloodhound contributor > http://issues.apache.org/bloodhound > http://blood-hound.net > > Brython committer > http://brython.info > http://github.com/brython-dev/brython > > SciPy Latin America - Cuban Ambassador > Chairman of SciPy LA 2017 - http://scipyla.org/conf/2017 > > Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/ > Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/ > > Featured article: >
