Two weeks seems like an eternity but we will have to do as you say. Massimo
On May 17, 11:09 pm, "mr.freeze" <[email protected]> wrote: > This is where web2py fails to earn its enterprise billing. Here's a > simple solution: Call the released version the development version and > promote the development version to the released version after 2-4 > weeks. > > On May 17, 10:38 pm, mdipierro <[email protected]> wrote: > > > You raise an excellent point. > > > So far the only security bug was the one reported a few months ago. > > 1) Yet we do need a mechanism for reporting this kind of problems. > > > 2) We also need a team of volunteers committed to check nightly built > > the week before release. So far very people check the nightly built. > > > 3) Definitively we need more tests about features in place to avoid > > that new features break old features. > > > Bugs in new features are going to happen no matter what but that is > > not a serious issue. > > > Massimo > > > On May 17, 10:00 pm, Kevin Bowling <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I'm going to take a stab in the dark and venture to say that I'm not > > > the only one using web2py in a "production" environment (i.e. people > > > other than me are accessing the app) :-P > > > > It seems that with many recent releases there are rather embarrassing > > > bugs. The worst was several months ago when authentication was > > > completely disabled. > > > > Can we adopt a strategy to minimize these potential disasters? A > > > sufficient beta channel would do the trick, and a tightening of what > > > is acceptable as a release build. > > > > Also, how about a security channel so we know when an old version is > > > unsafe and upgrades are mandatory? Is there any statement on this > > > already? > > > > Regards, > > > Kevin
