Quote:
Originally Posted by kovidgoyal
|
Ah, good data! So, in the 3 weeks since 2.83 was released, 25% of the installs are at that version or higher (for comparison, it's taken 3 months for ~50% of users to be at 2.79 or higher). That's a lot more than I would have expected, so I guess 2 weeks or so
would be quite enough.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovidgoyal
The purpose of the beta is to increase the probability that there are no showstopper bugs in commonly used functionality on all the major platforms calibre supports.
|
This does sound a lot more like the definition of a "Release Candidate" than a "Beta", but I do understand many people use "Beta" in this way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kovidgoyal
Since calibre follows the release early and often development philosophy, and has a fairly extensive test suite (at least for more modern features), that is all that is needed.
Feature requests get taken care of in the usual calibre release cadence.
|
OK.
BTW, do you follow semantic versioning conventions? That is, does changing from "2.x" to "3.x" indicate breaking backwards compatibility?