Upgrade version and pricing [was] Re: Fix it before moving ahead

[Brian Yennie]

> A better comparison is to other applications. For how long after 
> Office 2003 or Office 2004 for Mac came out did Microsoft continue to 
> release bug fixes for the previous versions? In my experience, the 
> answer has been, "about ten seconds."

I'm cringing at jumping into this thread, because I DO NOT think  
RunRev has exactly been guilty of poor support or response to bugs.

HOWEVER, I can't quite agree with the Office OR OS comparisons. Both 
are consumer products, not developer products. Frankly, developer 
products need to be more bug-free than consumer ones (in general, don't 
shoot me).

Another comparison would be PHP or MySQL. Both release many bug fix 
upgrades on older branches of code. MySQL is at 3.2.43 (or something 
like that), 4.0.16 (production), 4.1 (beta) and 5.0 (alpha). An extreme 
example, but 3.2 customers have a pretty solid product just by rolling 
back some bug fixes as they go. I do understand both projects have more 
resources behind them.

Here's a question I would pose to RunRev: if there are outstanding bugs 
in a current major release, is there a major release branch being 
maintained?

I wouldn't expect RunRev's capacity to support a dozen point releases 
on the 2.1 code, but if something big popped up, are they prepared to 
fix it?

Either way, I think we need to get back to the practical issues here: 
whether or not 2.1 is a useable release, and whether or not RunRev has 
the resources to put out 2.2 at the same time as 2.1.3, 2.1.4, etc.

Heck, I think we probably need to collectively take a look at 2.2 (it's 
already in beta) and then make our judgements...

- Brian