7.0-BETA1

[Greg Byshenk]

On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 02:00:42PM +0500, rihad wrote:
> >>rihad wrote:

> >>>How risky is it to start using 7.0-BETA1 in production, with the 
> >>>intention of upgrading to release as soon as possible? Thanks.

> My question was more a theoretical one: it's called BETA for some 
> reason, otherwise it'd still be in HEAD. To me BETA means that no major 
> architectural changes are expected in it any more, no?

Yes, but it doesn't mean that there can't be undiscovered bugs that could
cause problems.

 
> Our machine-to-be is quite mission-critical... But if I start with the 
> latest 6.x release, it would be more difficult to migrate to 7.0 when it 
> comes out than if I start with 7.0-BETA?. I've known people running 
> 4-STABLE or 5-STABLE branches on mission-critical machines, without even 
> bothering to upgrade, but I think they're stress-testing their luck ;-) 
> So I don't want to join their camp, that's why I asked for advice ;-) 
> Again it's named BETA for a reason, so it could be less intrusive than 
> STABLE?..
 
> I will definitely start with beta if it reaches BETA2 in a week or two - 
> the time I got ;-) Thanks for advice.

Well, if it is a "machine-to-be", then I suspect that you should be safe
in starting with 7.0-BETA. First, there don't appear to be any serious
problems with it, and second, if it is a new build "machine-to-be", then
you will have the opportunity to do the testing required to ensure that
there are no problems (in your situation) prior to rollout.


-- 
greg byshenk  -  gbyshenk at byshenk.net  -  Leiden, NL