flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Maurice Amsellem <maurice.amsel...@systar.com>
Subject RE: Should we release 4.12?
Date Sun, 09 Mar 2014 09:27:56 GMT
>At this point, if you can find the time to try rc6 and it works for you, then waiting a
couple more days to announce 4.12 may be the safest choice.

+1 ;-)  

So I will not add a word to this discussion before I have tested rc6.

Maurice 

-----Message d'origine-----
De : Alex Harui [mailto:aharui@adobe.com] 
Envoyé : dimanche 9 mars 2014 06:31
À : dev@flex.apache.org
Objet : Re: Should we release 4.12?

At this point, if you can find the time to try rc6 and it works for you, then waiting a couple
more days to announce 4.12 may be the safest choice.

But I still don't understand why we don't think better messaging with an asynchronous Installer
release would solve the problem regarding confusion.  I don't know if you folks remember when
an Adobe Flex beta installer wiped hard drives, but if we were to have such a problem I'm
sure we'd rush to release a new installer and announce it in a way that folks would not be
confused by it.  IOW, we might someday have to release in Installer without piggybacking on
a Flex SDK or FlexJS release, so we might as well practice our messaging to avoid the confusion.

For this 3.0 release, maybe the installer announcement can read something
like:

"Apache Flex announces the release of InstallApacheFlex 3.0, an upgrade to the current installer
that enables the Installer to not only install the current Apache Flex SDK (Apache Flex SDK
4.12.0) but also install release candidates and eventually releases of other Apache Flex products
like FlexJS."

And if rc6 fails, and we do release the Installer later, we should add:

"Reminder:  This release of InstallApacheFlex is independent of the release of the Apache
Flex SDK.  If you have upgraded to Apache Flex SDK 4.12.0, you do not need to re-install the
Apache Flex SDK after upgrading to InstallApacheFlex 3.0"

Thoughts?
-Alex


On 3/8/14 1:32 PM, "Maurice Amsellem" <maurice.amsellem@systar.com> wrote:

>>If Installer 3.0 piggybacks with SDK 4.12, we will have a lot of folks 
>>with an Installer that is capable of installing FlexJS.
>>Then once we actually release FlexJS 1.0, it is just a matter of 
>>updating the config file.
> >People can then readily download and install FlexJS without having to
>upgrade the Installer.
>>Since FlexJS is new, we cannot be sure that a lot of folks will jump 
>>at a new release and try it out.
>> It might well turn out to be more popular than I expect, but lets 
>>give a better chance off the bat.
>
>I understand that the new Installer 3.0 could benefit from the momentum 
>of SDK 4.12 release.
>I just wouldn't want that the opposite happens:
>- delaying too much the release of SDK 4.12 until Installer 3.0 is 
>ready
>- or worse: releasing too early, and having people failing to install 
>the new SDK because of unexpected issues in the new installer.
>
>
>
>Maurice
>
>-----Message d'origine-----
>De : omuppi1@gmail.com [mailto:omuppi1@gmail.com] De la part de 
>OmPrakash Muppirala Envoyé : samedi 8 mars 2014 22:13 À : 
>dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: Should we release 4.12?
>
>On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Maurice Amsellem < 
>maurice.amsellem@systar.com> wrote:
>
>> >Why the stealth release now?  What do we gain from that?  Someone 
>> >will
>> inevitably blog/tweet about it and we will be in a position to 
>> explain what's happening.
>> >I don't see any harm in waiting for a few days to release the sdk 
>> >and the
>> Installer together.
>>
>> - I agree there is no point for a stealth release
>> - I would agree to wait a few days for the installer to be ready 
>> (give a chance to RC6)
>>
>> BUT, for the reasons stated before ( Installer not linked to Flex 
>> SDK), I think that
>> -  if the installer still has issues in a few days then
>>   -   then we should proceed with announcement of SDK 4.12.
>>   - and postpone release of Installer to the next milestone of FlexJS 
>> (I am sure they will be many opportunities to do so).
>>
>> Sounds like a reasonable proposition.
>>
>>
>It does sound reasonable, but the only problem is that we will miss out 
>on the massive influx of visitors to the site that a Flex SDK release 
>brings.
> Take a look at the first chart here [1]  All the peaks correspond to 
>SDK releases.
>
>If Installer 3.0 piggybacks with SDK 4.12, we will have a lot of folks 
>with an Installer that is capable of installing FlexJS.  Then once we 
>actually release FlexJS 1.0, it is just a matter of updating the config 
>file.
> People can then readily download and install FlexJS without having to 
>upgrade the Installer.
>
>Since FlexJS is new, we cannot be sure that a lot of folks will jump at 
>a new release and try it out.  It might well turn out to be more 
>popular than I expect, but lets give a better chance off the bat.
>
>Thanks,
>Om
>
>[1] seethestats.com/site/flex.apache.org
>
>
>
>> WDYT ?
>>
>> Maurice
>>
>> -----Message d'origine-----
>> De : omuppi1@gmail.com [mailto:omuppi1@gmail.com] De la part de 
>> OmPrakash Muppirala Envoyé : samedi 8 mars 2014 18:09 À :
>> dev@flex.apache.org Objet : Re: Should we release 4.12?
>>
>> On Mar 8, 2014 8:57 AM, "Erik de Bruin" <erik@ixsoftware.nl> wrote:
>> >
>> > Nick, I think you hit the sweet spot.
>> >
>> > +1 on the stealth release now and a noisy announcement when the new
>> > Installer is available.
>> >
>> > EdB
>> >
>>
>> Why the stealth release now?  What do we gain from that?  Someone 
>> will inevitably blog/tweet about it and we will be in a position to 
>> explain what's happening.
>>
>> I don't see any harm in waiting for a few days to release the sdk and 
>> the Installer together.
>>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 1:48 PM, Nicholas Kwiatkowski 
>> ><nicholas@spoon.as
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> > > I say we "release" it but not make the announcements.  By 
>> > > release, I
>> mean
>> > > update the website, and update the installer config.  When we 
>> > > pass the installer vote, we can then do the blog post, and the 
>> > > official apache announcement.
>> > >
>> > > That way, we can get the new one out there, but only make the 
>> > > noise
>> once.
>> > >
>> > > -Nick
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On Sat, Mar 8, 2014 at 7:45 AM, Justin Mclean 
>> > > <justin@classsoftware.com
>> > > >wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hi,
>> > > >
>> > > > > I think both are different things, so I'll make a release of

>> > > > > SDK
>> 4.12
>> > > and
>> > > > > then after RC6 conclude a few days later will announce
>>Installer.
>> > > >
>> > > > So I think you mean to informally vote +1 to release both at 
>> > > > different times rather than -1 there?
>> > > >
>> > > > Thanks,
>> > > > Justin
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Ix Multimedia Software
>> >
>> > Jan Luykenstraat 27
>> > 3521 VB Utrecht
>> >
>> > T. 06-51952295
>> > I. www.ixsoftware.nl
>>


Mime
View raw message