Comment to 'Updated more frequent to fix important bug.'
  • I personally think that weekly security updates need to be in place while feature/requests can be done monthly. Keeping the development demand down will help not accrue added programming costs as well as the need for hiring more people. (although I wish I was smart enough to be on the team). I think that this is sufficient in terms of updates and should be suitable for all current members.

    • Weekly is unlikely. Any update, even minor, has to go through testing and packaging; then we need to produce an "update pack" along with the new version. Another thing - people with customised sites sometimes have automatic updates turned off, meaning that they may need to push manual updates or even sometimes do code-merging. Some of our own larger clients require manual update merging to staging instances, then review, approval and re-emerging to production sites. So, even a small update takes at least one week of various procedures, besides the development itself. So, unless an urgent update is required, it is best to keep to a once-a-month pace.

      That said, I think that once we have more resources, we should be able to push more frequent separate updates to the UNA apps - those are less disruptive and once the core platform becomes more stable they should make up the build of the new code.