3 ms·
Do you feel like having different channels of varying "stability" sufficiently addresses your concerns?
by dllthomas 4y ago
Do you feel like having different channels of varying "stability" sufficiently addresses your concerns?
- bombcar 4y agoPart of the problem is that so much of our “software” is now just weaponized webpages. And so there is no “staying on windows 7” for SaaS.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- JohnFen 4y agoIt's better than nothing, but it isn't really sufficient. Typically, the "stable" channel still releases too frequently. What would address my concern is if it were possible to skip releases, however rare or common they are, as I wish. But that raises an entirely different Bad Thing in the modern software industry -- that security updates are increasingly inseparable from other updates.
- SpicyLemonZest 4y agoIt can in some contexts, but I've never seen a "release channels" approach for e.g. a configuration UI. I'm not sure if that's because it's fundamentally incompatible with business needs or it's just not something UX devs are aware of.
- lazide 4y agoIt adds a huge support burden to devs and UX, as they need to support an increasing number of different UX versions or basically never change anything (which is bad for their career).
- dllthomas 4y agoSupporting multiple versions adds a huge burden, for sure, but I'm not sure it's bigger for a configuration UI or webpage than it is for any other application that has some kind of backend or data shared across the versions.