On Fri, Dec 24, 2010 at 10:18 PM, VP <vtp2...@gmail.com> wrote: > For one thing, I don't think the 2-button suggestion is a good idea; > it's just another indirect layer of information that might not be > meaningful if the underlying mechanism is meaningful. Conversely, if > the underlying mechanism is meaningful, there's no need for the 2- > button solution. For example, if the release mechanism follows > strictly Massimo's rule that 1.x.0 is likely a feature-introducing > "big release" with potential big bugs, where as 1.x.9 is likely a bug- > fixing release, then users can make intelligent decision to upgrade or > not; so there's no need for 2 buttons. If this rule is not adhered as > intended, however, then 2 buttons do not help.
2-button solution doesn't solve the issue of making informed decisions. It solves the issue of having an option between upgrading to the next stable release, versus upgrading to the next release candidate. The use-case is valid, and was outlined by Kenneth. Inclusion of changelog is a good idea as well. The best place would be the confirmation page for the upgrade action. It may also be worthwhile to consider a single-button upgrade with a drop-down on the confirmation page. -- Branko Vukelic stu...@brankovukelic.com http://www.brankovukelic.com/
