[discussion] Schema of Valentina server licensing

[Robert Brenstein]

>
>I hope everybody understand, that single 'ruslan' with all his efforts will
>not be able in short term produce something mature and big.

Yes, I am aware that you have a nice team now. "Ruslan" referred to 
you as a vendor. I'd have said "Paradigma Soft" :)

>-----------------
>And JOKE :-)
>Robert, so release are too frequent or you wait too long for new features?

Well, both ;) But seriously, I had my bouts of resentment when being 
forced to join some beta-cycles against my will.

>Guys, I just want to say, that we develop Valentina 2.0 kernel totally from
>scratch. We use new methods of design, new methods of TESTS(!). We grow our
>team. If all will be all right, next months we will get one more full time
>developer.

That is great but as any new product it will require a transition 
period to catch all new and different issues introduced with it. I am 
talking about bugs as well as of dealing with programming 
incongruities. And it won't be a simply swap but likely will require 
changes in our code (if only to take advantage of the new features).

>I say all this in mean that we now do NOT hurry with 2.0,
>But we do all the best to produce really quality product from box.
>
>>  So far, this has been only a matter of effort but now it may also be
>>  an issue of money if just happens that our license has expired. Are
>>  you, Ruslan, ready to promise providing bug fixes for older versions
>>  in paralell to ongoing development?
>
>Our bugs do not live long :-)

Once detected, yes. But what if one affecting me is detected after my 
license expires? Right now, you fix bugs only with the new betas. 
This means if I don't switch releases, I don't get them. Well, since 
they are free so do speak, it is up to me to put effort into upgrade. 
However, once money is involved, the picture changes.

With introduction of the ver 2 family, it may be time to change the 
policy and start providing bug fixes for the last official release 
*independently* from the development of the new release. It means 
that if I am using version 2.1 and you are now at 2.2b4 and a bug 
affecting 2.1 is found, you release a bug fix for 2.1 besides fixing 
it for 2.2b5. This way, if I want to participate in beta testing, I 
can get the new beta, but if I don't or my license expired, I simply 
get the bug fix.

>Robert, you ask about 1.x?
>Or about future?

Future mostly, although introducing this for 1.x products could be 
considered even for the next public release. It will probably be 
necessary once 2 is out. You may wish that all of us switch to 
version 2 right away, but in reality we have our development cycles 
just as you do and many people won't upgrade immediately.

This is not so outrageous request. Go to FileMaker Pro -- updaters 
(bug fix releases) for all releases starting from version 4.0 are 
there. Go to CodeWarrior's site -- updaters for most of the versions 
not just last one are available.

>I think we will do right thing for software industry.

I select products not by what the industry is but by what a given 
product offers and its vendor delivers. And right now you are not 
even up to what others offer.

>  > I guess what I am questionning is not the sales model as such but
>>  whether Valentina is a mature enough product to switch to using a
>>  subscription model at this time.
>
>Robert, note, we speak now about Valentina 2.0

Yes, but only now you say that 2 will be delayed until more features 
are put it. I have been waiting for some for quite a while.

>  > By the way, it is not clear to me from this discussion whether the
>>  pricing of non-server products remains as it was or are these also
>>  switched to the subscription model?
>
>YES.

yes, remains or yes, it changes?

Robert