>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Update releases haven't been "just patches" for many years; many >> new features were introduced that way. > >So a thought just dawned on me - how does this really preserve >customer's confidence in a stable release if it's not just patches >anymore? While I'm sure we can guarantee stability etc. is the fact that >we're putting so much stuff into the updates discouraging large ISVs >upgrading? > >Mostly just curious and trying to understand the types of decisions >being made.
Well, it's all marketing and little substance. The customer believes that the releases carrying a fixed name the longest is the most stable. We think that all releases are about as stable, and FCS is pretty close to being well-intergrated, well, tested and very compatible. We do allow for slightly more incompatibilities between S10 and S11; but those are few and far between. The stablest release is always the one the customer runs without trouble; and upgrade will cause some issues. Casper _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
