Marc Santhoff wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 29.08.2007, 18:51 -0500 schrieb Barbara Duprey:
Marc Santhoff wrote:
Am Mittwoch, den 29.08.2007, 16:16 -0500 schrieb Barbara Duprey:
Yes, I really, really want to go to 2.3, but the site is still offering
2.2.1 as the latest stable release and I'm not sure a development build
is what I want. So I seem to have these choices: stick with 2.0.4 until
2.3 comes out and then upgrade; upgrade to 2.2.1 and then to 2.3 in a
few(?) days; upgrade to the latest 2.3 development build and then to 2.3
when it's stable. Are you saying that the latest 2.3 development build
really is stable enough for production work? If so, I'll gladly go to
it. I'm on WinXP, us-en, so the more arcane aspects of locale and so on
don't really affect me.
Don't be shy, upgrading on a windows machine is pretty easy and fast. I
did it while watching TV last time. ;)
The only thing I'm not really sure about is which version replaces the
installed one and which is installing itself side by side. I think the
readme will tell or there are some command line switches.
At least the 2.3.0-dev version installed itself in parallel to an
existing 2.2.0 release by default.
Marc
Marc, I'm definitely not shy, and the downloading itself doesn't scare
me; I'm just cautious about introducing a bunch of new variables into my
production process. Quite a few other people depend on my data to be
accurate, and I pretty much know what I've got with my current setup,
ancient though it may be -- with the precaution of not allowing
"recovery" unless there was a crash while my database was open. (It
looks as if I actually did the OOo download 12/7/2006; 2.0.4 was the
current release, and this was my first foray into the world of open
source. I'm definitely a convert!)
Maybe anxious would have been a better word ...
OK, I'll buy that! I've had so much fun already I don't think I could
stand much more!
You guys have been so busy there's
always been a new release coming just around the corner, so I've been
hanging back waiting for an offer I can't refuse -- and 2.3 looks like
it. I'd love to be able to run in parallel with my updates on both
versions, but there isn't time; I have to pick one. So which way do you
think I'm safer doing my production work? 2.0.4, or the current
development build of 2.3? Or do I need to take a side trip into 2.2.1?
If the safety of stable working applications is important I'd handle
upgrades the same way as you are. And since the process of testing
anything important and some not so important issues as well, I'd
recommend doing as you are planning to:
Get 2.3.x if it is out (maybe waiting some days for ruling out
showstoppers popping up after the public release) and then test it
thoroughly in a testbed similar to the production environment with real
data.
Besides the targetted milestone releases intermediate updates would only
be considered if they bring in desperately needed features or bugfixes.
Sorry for pushing. ;)
Marc
No problem -- I'm just glad you're there and willing to talk to me!
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
