Release Schedules and Feedback on Fixes

[Ruslan Zasukhin]

On 12/06/12 1:59 PM, "Robert Brenstein" <rjb at robelko.com> wrote:

> What I mean, in case someone is not clear what branching refers to,
> that when let's say Valentina 2.5 is released, the Paradigma team
> starts working on 2.6 release, that is working on implementing new
> features and enhancing existing ones. However, bug fixes are still
> provided to the 2.5 branch, so we get 2.5.1, 2.5.2, etc while being
> able to play or work with 2.6b1, 2.6b2 etc (which of course
> incorporate the bux fixes from 2.5.x branch).
> 
> One of the issues is that if I stay with, let's say, Valentina 2.4
> because of development/release schedule and support needed for my
> products using Valentina, as soon as a few new Valentina releases are
> out, I am essentially out of proper support since any Valentina
> coding problems require me updating to the most recent version. None
> of the official releases ever reaches stable maturity which allows us
> to ship our product with it and enjoy freedom to move along to the
> next version of Valentina and our products at our own pace.
> 
> I have been using Valentina for many, many years, and I am generally
> happy with the product and recommend it often to others. This list
> and the suport provided by Ruslan and his team are also fantastic.
> However, I could never understand why they don't do branching, which
> is de facto industry standard. After all, this is what version
> control solutions (CVS, Subversion, and dozen other) are all about. I
> am pretty sure that one of them is used by the Paradigma team, so it
> is "only" the matter of changing the procedures.
> 
> In my personal opinion, branching is essential if Valentina is to
> become a serious enterprise player and has so far been sorely ignored
> aspect of the product strategy.

Main reason I think, because we have TWO groups of developers.
For example:

    we have 2.4.3 in 15 September
    we have 2.5 in 25 Nov.

Not big period. Right? It is not even fast 6-months release model.

1) We have group of people who have meet bugs in 2.4.3.
They want fix of bugs. Timeline of all found fixes 1.5-2 months.

2) second group say: we need SSL and Bonjour tomorrow to make our projects.

- So me and Ivan have work on bugs.
- Ivan also have work on SSL.
- Kiril have work independently on Bonjour.
- Sergey have work on PIVOT and WITH
- other developers separate tasks and VStudio.

SSL and Bonjour do not affect engine and not bring new bugs. We see this
perfectly.

We run our regression tests to see that we not break EXISTED functionality.
So where is problem?

--------
So far I do not hear that e.g. 2.5 have break something from existed
functionality. 

We have found with Jon, that some of his troubles was because he did have
users with 2.0 (!!!) dbs format made on PPC and they have move in September
first time to INTEL using V4RB UB 2.4.3. Bug was in convert 2.0 -> 2.3.
It is fixed now in 2.5 also.

Agree - very rare bug. Users which already was on 2.3, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, ...
Will not meet this problem...


--------
So I try protect our team that we really bring new bugs in each 2.x.
I very doubt. Protection from this is - regression tests.


-- 
Best regards,

Ruslan Zasukhin
VP Engineering and New Technology
Paradigma Software, Inc

Valentina - Joining Worlds of Information
http://www.paradigmasoft.com

[I feel the need: the need for speed]