XYplorer Beta Club

10.3 through to and inclusive of 10.5 have been released over the course of about 5 weeks. Those on a Standard license may find this a bit worry-some as that license model revolves around one complete cycle. Last time 9.90 > 10.00 took over 6 months, but there is no word that the same will be the case again.

Frankly, it doesn't make a difference to me as I am on a lifetime license, but I was just taking a view from the outside.

That's probably the first time in history that a technophile worries about too fast development.

But no need for worries. The Standard License is not defined by time but by numbers. And, to me, the long gap between 9.90 and 10.00 actually even would "justify" a faster pace now -- but no justification necessary. I could publish v20.00 tomorrow if I felt like that. No word would be broken.

admin wrote: The Standard License is not defined by time but by numbers. And, to me, the long gap between 9.90 and 10.00 actually even would "justify" a faster pace now -- but no justification necessary. I could publish v20.00 tomorrow if I felt like that. No word would be broken.

I agree with both of you here...but...based on overall release history that I've seen, a user could reasonably expect to get about one years worth of updates with the standard licence so I would suggest bumping the minor vers (the "yy" in x.yy.zzz) no more than every 35 days or so and use the "zzz" if more frequent updates are needed.

While it's true that there is currently no defined time span to that license, making it approx a year via adjustments of "zzz" vs "yy" would give users a feeling of consistent expectations.

I'm a little too lazy to determine the average length of the standard license but here's some fun data for the time between releases:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... khwZm80NEE

As of yesterday, the change log lists 2,092 releases, of which I consider 131 to be milestones (Official / Maintenance / Novelty Titled / Introduces New Minor Version).

On average there is a new release every two days, with the median slightly under one day.

FYI, the longest wait was was 335 days between v3.20.0085 (Dec 4, 2000) and v3.20.0086 (Nov 4, 2001).

TheQwerty wrote:I'm a little too lazy to determine the average length of the standard license but here's some fun data for the time between releases:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc ... khwZm80NEE

As of yesterday, the change log lists 2,092 releases, of which I consider 131 to be milestones (Official / Maintenance / Novelty Titled / Introduces New Minor Version).

On average there is a new release every two days, with the median slightly under one day.

FYI, the longest wait was was 335 days between v3.20.0085 (Dec 4, 2000) and v3.20.0086 (Nov 4, 2001).

Wow, now it's official: I'm mad.

j_c_hallgren wrote:

admin wrote: The Standard License is not defined by time but by numbers. And, to me, the long gap between 9.90 and 10.00 actually even would "justify" a faster pace now -- but no justification necessary. I could publish v20.00 tomorrow if I felt like that. No word would be broken.

I agree with both of you here...but...based on overall release history that I've seen, a user could reasonably expect to get about one years worth of updates with the standard licence so I would suggest bumping the minor vers (the "yy" in x.yy.zzz) no more than every 35 days or so and use the "zzz" if more frequent updates are needed.

While it's true that there is currently no defined time span to that license, making it approx a year via adjustments of "zzz" vs "yy" would give users a feeling of consistent expectations.

XY development is driven by ideas. I'm creative, yeah! Ideas come when they come. Unpredictably.
XY development is also driven by sales. No sales, no food. No food, no developer. No developer, no development.
The combination of these forces results in the groovy publication rhythm. Anybody who cannot dance to it should get the Lifetime License.

admin wrote:Wow, now it's official: I'm mad.

I've done a quick big update that should make it easier to compare your Release-cycle vs the Milestone-cycle, which should get it closer to the actual standard lifetime.

TheQwerty wrote:

admin wrote:Wow, now it's official: I'm mad.

I've done a quick big update that should make it easier to compare your Release-cycle vs the Milestone-cycle, which should get it closer to the actual standard lifetime.

Personally I would not count Maintenance Release as a milestone. They are usually hot fixes.

admin wrote:Anybody who cannot dance to it should get the Lifetime License.

It's the same problem for lifetime licenses. Our children and grandchildren also want their 115,060 releases like their forebears.

admin wrote:Personally I would not count Maintenance Release as a milestone. They are usually hot fixes.

I've removed data prior to v4.40.0000 and now milestones are only official releases.

CURIOUS OF FUTURE(be serious):And what would happen after 30 to 40 years,when you become old,will U hand over/sell
the development to others or do u have a son who will take in charge of it.

alps wrote:CURIOUS OF FUTURE(be serious):And what would happen after 30 to 40 years,when you become old,will U hand over/sell
the development to others or do u have a son who will take in charge of it.

It's not possible to talk seriously about the future.

alps wrote:At least tell your age and is your son also a programmer?

Don has his very own stalker

alps wrote:At least tell your age and is your son also a programmer?

Anything else? A photo of my penis, maybe?