* Also sprach Daniel Wagner-Hall <dawag...@gmail.com
> I'm not sure what this gains us in a world where every older version
> is available. I believe the current mechanism is as you describe, with
> one additional step: if users have issues, they down grade until the
> issue is resolved. This may be annoying for them, but it's also a
> workable solution, and means that we have more users doing that
> As we've moved to ~weekly releases, I'm sure a lot of people are also
> just skipping some updates, too.
I agree pretty much agree with what's being said here.
Maintaining different release channels for Selenium would be _a huge_
undertaking considering the complexities of this project. Considering
that we're not pushing Selenium to any package management systems for
OSes, this is a workable solution.
I'm unsure what the “@Beta” thing means in all of this. Does it mean we
will continue to maintain and release important fixes for the stable
(previous) version, effectively introducing two release channels? Or
does it mean the users will just have to upgrade to the latest bleeding
edge to get patches for bugs?
This sounds suboptimal to me. I realize that Selenium is not an
ordinary project and cannot offer the same LTS release schemes as other
traditional software (like in the traditions of Debian) without major
effort, and frankly there is no need to do so for the core project
either, but there is a chance we'll be communicating things less clearly
by separating between final- and beta versions.
I'd personally like to see Selenium reach such a stable state that a
user wouldn't have to upgrade in between minor (x.Y.z) releases, but
with things moving so fast within the browser automation world, I
realize that might be a far stretch.
I'd like to hear the reasons for introducing “@Beta”, as it seems to me
that Daniel Wagner-Hall's described approach above (“if things doesn't
work for you, please downgrade and use the previous version until we get
time to fix it and release a newer version”) seems more than adequate to
but then this is all just really a symptom of our testing environment
not being good enough.
Whenever we catch a bug like above, we should actively be finding ways
to test for that in the future. That said, we also need to make it
easier and more stable to run the full stack of tests. Or, in the
least, ensure that our CI environment is functioning correctly.
Andreas Tolf Tolfsen
Systems Developer, Core Systems
Opera Software ASA