> Runrev, here is your release history. Under the current licensing model > which of these would have been called maintenance releases and which > would have been called feature releases? 2.1 and 1.1 are the > non-obvious ones. 2.0 clearly was a feature release. > > Version 2.1: August 25, 2003 > Version 2.0.3: August 22, 2003 > Version 2.0.2: July 14, 2003 > Version 2.0.1: June 4, 2003 > Version 2.0: May 26, 2003 > Version 1.1.1: April 2, 2002 > Version 1.1: November 5, 2001 > Version 1.0: July 1, 2001 > > My boss just asked me if we should get the SBE renewal license or the > new Studio license and I told him that I really have no idea which > would be a better value. >
Hi Alex I wouldn't count anything prior to the 2.0 release in your reasoning here. 2.1 is a feature release. My understanding is the numbering scheme goes: major.feature.bugfix I've commented on the improve list (without any reply) that unless there are a minimum or 4 feature releases per year that the Enterprise Edition is more expensive to maintain than the Studio Edition. Two Studio Editions could be upgraded 3 times per year for $294. One Enterprise Edition can be maintained for $299. It should be noted that Since the release of 2.0 RunRev has managed 3 bugfix releases and a feature release in under 3 months. All this while attending a number of trade shows, buying MC and changing the licensing scheme. Therefore one would assume that RunRev intend to deliver on the 4 feature releases per year. If it were me and I had two months up my sleeve I'd wait and make sure the < 3 month cycle continues. Regards Monte _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
