I find myself, oddly in general agreement. See comments in context. "Denver Braughler"
> > John Bertoglio wrote: > To me, major releases are those that require actions like recompiling all object code, > reformatting the database, running some sort of conversion, or, code changes. Very important point. A true maintainence release would simply fix things without major efforts. I might give a pass to recompiles of classes since even the most trivial change usually requires this. > > Minor releases add new features but should not break mature code. > A minor release (say, x.3) could supersede the preceding minor release (x.2) where an > error is being corrected that affects recent code using new features in a manner that > requires some re-coding, but does not affect mature code. > In such a case, x.2 would be listed a "recalled". Again, right on. If x.2 is really broken then it is reasonable, if somewhat annoying, to have to take certain steps like recompiling your code. However, as above, things like conversion should never happen at this level. > > Maintenance releases fix bugs or make small tweaks like another parameter to existing > features that are so isolated that the chance of adverse consequences to existing > installations is negligible. > Probably they should be released as a patch to an existing binary executable or as an > XML export file. > This is how most people do it. > 5.0.11 sounds too plump to be a mere maintenance release. Good plumpness, but I agree. The real test is this: If I upgrade and nothing (bad) happens, it is maintenance release. > > Exactly what 5.1 will require, I have not heard. > But I also think that it probably warrants being classified as a major release because > if nothing else, existing procedures regarding user security may have to be changed. If the security is a superset of the existing system (that is, you can do new stuff in new ways but you can continue to work as before), I would not consider it a big change. If after I install 5.1 no one can get into the system, that is a pretty big deal. For example, dropping support for Win 95/98 is not a big deal if the issue is just internal support. If it NO LONGER RUNS of these systems, this is a big change and should be noted by a signficiatn revision. jb
