Getting Close … Etomite v1.0
April 24, 2008 – 8:41 pm by Dean ClintonWell Guys and Gals, it’s getting close! Etomite v1.0 IS COMING VERY SOON!
I’ve just completed the upgrade of the main Etomite website onto the latest version, and it went without a hitch.. so I think we’re almost ready to go!
6 Responses to “Getting Close … Etomite v1.0”
Comment By vw53a on Apr 28, 2008
Could you give a global clue as to wether we should think in terms of hours, days, weeks or months?
I’m creating a new site on my own domain from which the final database will have to be ported to the clients new host somewhere before summer.
What’s the best thing to do now:
1) wait a few hours or days and start with v1.0 alltogether,
2) start with v0.6.1.4 on your own server and port the database in a few weeks time to a fresh v1.0 installation on the clients server,
3) keep everything in v0.6.1.4 and when sometimes after the summer holidays v1.0 becomes available, make the conversion on the clients server, or
4) Wait a few months and than start in a hurry with v1.0 on the clienst server ’cause the db isn’t upgradable and/or transportable?
(P.S.: I would be very very very surprised if you’d suggest option 4, my guess is on option 2, but my hope’s on option 1 ofcourse.)
Comment By Dean Clinton on Apr 28, 2008
(4) LOL! Nah, it’s not 4……..
(1) Days - Ralph’s got a date in his head when he wants it all done and released by… 1st May
Comment By vw53a on Apr 28, 2008
WOW! I’ll strikethrough everything thats allready in my agenda for this weekend.
Comment By PaulD on Apr 28, 2008
Can’t wait either….
Just like vw53a, I too have a site I want to rebuild but am waiting for 1.0! Unlike vw53a it is only a personal site so have ploughed on with 6.1.4, but am hanging on for now, baited breathe.
Why not release as version 7.0? I am sure there are good reasons and formalities about these things but then there would be no confusion anywhere. Or how about version 2.0 just for the hypey name?
Paul
Comment By Pelleke on Apr 29, 2008
Euh Paul, you seem to make a little mistake with these versioning numbers, it sounds like in your story 1.0 is a lower number than 6.1(.x).
The thing is that we shouldn’t be talking about version 6.x, but about version 0.6.x, so 1.0 means the first official stable release. (0.x might of course be suitable for production purposes, but officialy they’re still beta.)
I agree to the devvers numbering the next milestone with “1.0″. That really shows us that there has been going on a lot, and that results have been made. It might well be possible indeed that a more stable version is going to be released, however, if really so many things have changed, why not call it 0.991 for a little while (or if you prefer that: 1.0 RTM)
Comment By PaulD on Apr 30, 2008
Hey Pelleke, yes you are right. I must have been too excited about the new release and my mind was boggling - that or too much wine, or too sleepy, or just plain stupid!!!!!
I suppose I was saying something like: since there are no ‘laws’ about it, then version numbers can be chosen to suit marketing needs, and version 7.0 seems more mature than 1.0, however with 93,609 downloads from sourceforge, who really cares…they are after all only a reference number.
Just ignore me and thank you for the correction.
Paul