Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!rutgers!mcnc!xanth!kent
From: kent@xanth.UUCP (Kent Paul Dolan)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Question about Manx C updates
Message-ID: <2231@xanth.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 23-Aug-87 06:12:46 EDT
Article-I.D.: xanth.2231
Posted: Sun Aug 23 06:12:46 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 23-Aug-87 22:26:47 EDT
References: <8708191652.AA06573@THYME.LCS.MIT.EDU> <2195@xanth.UUCP> <1030@bsu-cs.UUCP>
Reply-To: kent@xanth.UUCP (Kent Paul Dolan)
Organization: Old Dominion University, Norfolk Va.
Lines: 42
Summary: 3.4 isn't the problem, 3.2 is.

In article <1030@bsu-cs.UUCP> jdh@bsu-cs.UUCP (John Hiday) writes:
>In article <2195@xanth.UUCP> kent@xanth.UUCP (Kent Paul Dolan) writes:
>>In article <8708191652.AA06573@THYME.LCS.MIT.EDU> atheybey@ptt.lcs.mit.edu
>>writes:
>>>
>>> [Question about difference between $50 and free Manx 3.20 -> 3.4 update]
>>>
>>>[... This] seems to imply that I will just be getting a fixed 3.2
>>>compiler, rather than 3.4.
>>
>>Back in 1981 I worked for a company that let itself be sucked into the
>>trap of maintaining multiple parallel versions of the same software.
>> [Remainder deleted...]
>
>Huh?  3.20 and 3.4 are not parallel versions as far as I know.
>
>The deal is: Send in $0.00 and you get the 3.4 release of the package you
>have.  Send in $50.00 and you get the afforementioned 3.4 release PLUS
>several utilities like make, grep, diff, Z (vi clone), etc.
[more deleted...]

Well, on the presumption that 3.2 derived from 3.4, and that the bug fixes
to 3.2 exist, then they are headed right for the tar bits!  ;-)

The point I was trying to make was that it isn't worth the $50 per copy
difference TO MANX to continue maintaining 3.2.  I've been there - trust me.

After we got the software at my former employers up to a new release point,
we then lost 4-6 weeks, typically of two people full time, while the updates
were merged and tested into the multiple releases.  And promptly as we let
them out, the bug reports due to the confusion this caused US, started
pouring in.

Now if MANX receives a bug report on 3.2, and researches and fixes it (and,
by nature, they grow more subtle with time, the easy ones shake out early),
then they must enter the scenario I described in my earlier posting, of
trying to make the corresponding change in 3.4, WITHOUT BREAKING all the
changes from 3.2 to 3.4, and subsequent bug fixes to 3.4.

All the neat utilities released with 3.4 are irrelevant to the discussion.

Kent, the man from xanth.