[OPEN-ILS-GENERAL] Proposal to change Evergreen versioning scheme

[Lebbeous Fogle-Weekley]

Alexey,

I think you're way off when you say that there's a wider audience dealing
with Evergreen directly than with PostgreSQL and Linux.  You must know that
the former has many thousands of direct users, and the latter millions.

Plenty of people concerned with those projects are in the management layer
at various organizations that use F/LOSS for all kinds of things.  It's odd
to me that you suggest that Evergreen is special in that library directors
and other people besides developers are interested in it.  That situation
isn't unique to Evergreen at all.


On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 3:39 PM, Lazar, Alexey Vladimirovich <
alexey.lazar at mnsu.edu> wrote:

>
> On 2013-01-04, at 14:23 , Rogan Hamby <rogan.hamby at yclibrary.net>
>  wrote:
>
> > As a postscript,
> >
> > P.S.
> >
> > My previous statements are not an argument against change.  As I said
> before, I have nothing against eating my liver hash (apologies to those who
> like liver) for greater health but I want the benefit to be clear and
> substantial for the hassle I can guarantee you I (and others) will have.
>
> Hi, Rogan. Why would there be any more hassle than during a regular
> upgrade to a new version?
>
> Aleksey Lazar
> PALS
> IS Developer and Intergrator
> 507-389-2907
> http://www.pals.org/
> alexey.lazar at mnsu.edu
>
>
>
>


-- 
Lebbeous Fogle-Weekley
 | Software Developer
 | Equinox Software, Inc. / The Open Source Experts
 | phone:  1-877-OPEN-ILS (673-6457)
 | email:  lebbeous at esilibrary.com
 | web:  http://www.esilibrary.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://libmail.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-general/attachments/20130104/402935e3/attachment-0001.htm>