[Zope] 2.3.0 really not Beta?

[Andy McKay]

My only comment would seem to be that some problems are not directly related
to the Zope version but rather the products that people install with it.
LocalFS is one we are picking on, but a good example of a rock solid cool
product that dies on Zope 2.3. Multiply this with many products and people
assume Zope 2.3 has problems.

Perl has the ability to run checks on a module to see if it will pass a test
in a particular version. Im thinking more checking and work on keeping the
products in sync or at least tested, with Zope versions and platforms whilst
difficult to do may help. That is an issue for another thread/day though.

--
  Andy McKay.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Brian Lloyd" <brian@digicool.com>
To: <tim@freepm.org>; <stephan.goeldi@datacomm.ch>
Cc: <zope@zope.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2001 8:37 AM
Subject: RE: [Zope] 2.3.0 really not Beta?


> > > Because I am not a programmer. I am an administrator and
> > > webdesigner. Without this class of users, there would be
> > > no use for Zope. Except for your hobby.
> >
> > I don't want to participate in a war here. But if you do not
> > intend to test betas and report problems (which an administrator
> > can still do) then I suggest that you stay one to two versions
> > behind and NEVER install a ".0" version of anything.  You won't
> > have the latest functionallity but you won't have the problems
> > associated with it either.  That's the RealWorld(tm)! <g>
>
> I too am not interested in a war - there is too much volume
> on this list already. So I will attempt to clarify some
> things and leave it at that.
>
> There are many types of users in the Zope community. Some are
> early-adopter types who are happy to try out early alphas and
> use the public CVS. Others are very dependable in using beta
> releases in their environment and are very active in reporting
> and diagnosing problems. Some (quite reasonably) don't have
> the time or inclination to do these things and that is fine
> too.
>
> We have a documented release process (see dev.zope.org), where
> we introduce new features (in feature releases) in alphas. In
> the beta cycle, no new features are added - only bugs are fixed.
>
> The reality is that we get quite a few people who use the betas
> in many different environments with many different configurations,
> installed products etc. - for these folks we are all grateful.
>
> But even a lot of people saying "works for me" in a lot of different
> environments does not guarantee "works for everyone". There is a
> practical limitation to the coverage that a beta cycle can provide.
>
> There is a curve of diminishing returns, bug reports tail off
> as the part of community using the betas get to "works for me". As
> a practical matter, at some point a release has to be made, because
> of the simple fact that *you will not find the rest of the bugs
> until it is used by the wider community*, and the expanded
> coverage that implies. You could stay in beta for the next year
> and you will still have this problem, just a year later.
>
> If this offends you, then by all means take the advice earlier
> in this thread: stay with an earlier release until you are
> comfortable. Don't take _our_ word for it, take the community's
> word. Ask around to people with similar configurations. This is
> not an "open source software" issue - its not even just a software
> issue.
>
> If the new 2002 model of your favorite sports car comes out
> "totally redesigned", you have the same choice to make. Surely
> the engineers who designed did their level best to find problems
> before putting it out there, but does that guarantee that there
> won't be any? No - you need to decide whether you need that new
> sunroof today or if you're going to hang onto your '99 and wait
> for any problems with the 2002 to shake out.
>
> To be fair to the many folks who worked on 2.3, I think that it
> is easily the most stable '.0' release that Zope has had. That
> is thanks to a lot of hard work and attention to detail on the
> part of the contributors, the Fishbowl and a generally more
> mature development process. I don't think anyone who was around
> for earlier '.0' releases would argue this point.
>
> As with any .0 release, we know full well that there will need
> to be a .1 relatively soon afterward to take care of any
> important issues. This will happen with a 2.3.1 in the next
> few weeks.
>
> </war>
>
>
> Brian Lloyd        brian@digicool.com
> Software Engineer  540.371.6909
> Digital Creations  http://www.digicool.com
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Zope maillist  -  Zope@zope.org
> http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope
> **   No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
> (Related lists -
>  http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce
>  http://lists.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev )
>