[imp] Version Question

[Rich West]

That was kind of what I was thinking, too.  Admittedly, the whole suite 
works rather well, including Kronolith, which is now SQL based rather 
than mcal and mstore based. :)


I guess I get to stick with the HEAD branch until the STABLE (or is it 
RELEASE?) catches up.  Downgrading might introduce some database 
differences, I would guess, that might be a bit painful..

-Rich


Eric Rostetter wrote:

>Quoting Rich West <Rich.West@divatv.com>:
>
>>Hrmm.. I only realized today that I had downloaded the HEAD branch of 
>>everything from CVS, which means that I am running IMP-4.0 from CVS.
>>
>>I've been running this for 2 to 3 weeks now with little (aka: no) 
>>problems, except periodic login display problems under Netscape 6.x 
>>(never seen under IE by our users).
>>
>>The question is:  Is running this version a Bad Thing(tm)?  If so, how 
>>would one propose to 'downgrade' to the right version?
>>
>
>If you have no problems after 3 weeks, then you might as well stick with
>it as it is obviously meeting your needs!
>
>Generally I don't recommend the HEAD branch for production.  If you want
>to do it anyway, then just be sure to test it well before you set your
>users loose.  The 2-3 weeks you've been using it migbt be considered
>a reasonable test period by some, and reason to stick with it.
>
-- 
Richard West                            mailto:richard.west@divatv.com
Sr. Systems Administrator
Diva - Princeton, NJ                    http://www.divatv.com