What we'll do is post a clear link to the nightly build and call it a release candidate. The change policy that about testing before turning the release candidate into stable.
On May 18, 6:53 am, Albert Abril <[email protected]> wrote: > Personally, I prefer as we had until now, because add a dev and a stable > release may be a little bit complex and confusing. > Now, we have mercurial and nightly for testing purposes, and the official > version for production. > If we add more branchs, I think it could confuse new people. > > (sorry my poor english :) ) > > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 1:29 PM, Iceberg <[email protected]> wrote: > > Maintaining a 2-4 weeks gap between development release and production > > release, is certainly a systematic precaution which can earn us some > > time for bug finding and fixing. However it only works best when a > > significant amount of volunteers who is willing to update to latest > > development release quickly and often. > > > From technical point of view, we still need more doctest, unittest > > cases to cover as much as possible features. > > > On May18, 12:12pm, mdipierro <[email protected]> wrote: > > > 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
