FiveTech Support Forums

I am fine with that. The main key is to post the fixes ASAP. I'm actually using 13.09 for distribution product, both with xHarbour, and Harbour/MSVC 2012. When improvements are released I like to use them right away, but bug fixes may well be needed.

Tim

No se si he entendido bien la discusión, de ser así os pido disculpas.
A mi me parece que está bien como está, una actualización por mes. Quién no quiera que no se actualice hasta pasados 2, 3 ó 'x' meses.

I do not know if I understand the discussion, if so I apologize.
It seems to me that is fine as it is, an update per month. Who does not want to not be updated until after 2, 3 or 'x' months.

Tim:

I emailed you at Support @ MasterLinkSoftware.com.

Thank you for your answer.

Hello,

I think it is better to stop having month updates, as every month they are bugs and it is imposible to use the latest build.

Fivetech needs some time to test in deep and very careful the changes. Antonio is right about two months update.

Carlos, I am afraid you are stopped at 13.05, and you are not experiencing the bugs in latest builds.

A buggy month build is useless and causes to lost important time.

Thanks ))

For me the important thing is not the number of releases per year, for me is more important the content and stability.

A monthly update is too much, I thing ther isn't enougth time to develop and test new features, only minor improvements and fixes.

A minimum of three versions per year, is fine for me.

tres o cuatro versiones al año, esta bien para mi.

Otra cosa son los errores o problemas que aparezcan en la última versión disponible.
Hasta ahora cada vez que descargo una versión, tengo que buscar en el foro todos los ajustes necesarios para su correcto funcionamiento.
Me gusta lo que se ha hecho con la versión del 13.08. Cada vez que había un cambio se volvía a publicar las librerías (2ª revisión, 3ª revisión)
De esta forma al descargar la librería, sabes que siempre es la mas estable que ahí.

three or four versions per year, is fine for me.

Another thing are errors or problems that appear in the latest version.
So far every time I download a version, I have to search the forum all the necessary adjustments for proper operation.
I like what was done with version 13.08. Every time there was a change was republished libraries (2nd revision, 3rd revision)
This way downloading the library, you know it's always more stable there.

Hi,

12,6,4,2,1 .... versions per year, WHY ?
Why not only when needed ?

Probably reported bugs need to be good analised ... and new version only when there are solved more bugs or some critical bug ... not matter if there are 2 versions per month or 1 version per year ..

Best regards,

Antonio,
Almost everyone agree that is most important to have a FWH stable than to have 12 upgrades per year.
I think, because FWH (and new windows OS) complexity, would be reasonably to wait, at least, 3 months between FWH upgrades.

Regards,

George

What about a nightly build like release + a quarterly stable release?

Elvira, en casi todas las versiones hay bugs, y naturalmente también los he sufrido; es más he dejado de usar una versión a la espera de que quedara resuelto algún bug importante.
Lo que quiero decir es que si a Antonio le va mejor realizar actualizaciones cada 1 ó 2 meses, a nosotros no nos debe importar, es nuestra elección usarlas o no. En cierta manera estamos detectando bugs, y no le voy a pedir a Antonio más de lo que le pido a Windows.

Google traductor
Elvira, in many versions there are bugs, and of course I have suffered, is've stopped using a version pending that was resolved some major bug.
What I mean is that if Antonio does better perform updates every 1 to 2 months, we should not matter to us, it is our choice to use them or not. In a way we are detecting bugs, and I'm not going to ask Antonio more than I ask Windows.

I do agree, monthly update is too much and it will not complete test for new features release because of insufficient time.

I don't update the new release every month, still use 1305.