On 08/10, Michael Davidsaver wrote:
> On 08/10/2016 11:53 AM, J. Lewis Muir wrote:
> > Maybe I missed an announcement, but when did this become the case?
>
> What announcement would you have liked?
An announcement that 3.15 is now considered stable and suitable for
production use.
> Base developers can't promise that 3.15 won't break your machine :)
Sure, but Base developers can't promise that for any series.
> > What's the difference between the "current" and "stable" series?
>
> Ah, what is in a name?
>
> 3.14.x, aka "stable". The workhorse of the past decade+. Many
> facilities using. No longer getter new features (unless someone twists
> Andrew's arm). Still getting bug fixes.
>
> 3.15.x, aka "current". Some API breaks wrt. 3.14. Almost all major
> modules updated at this point. Getting some minor features (as Ralph's
> arm is twisted), and bug fixes. In use at ITER and FRIB that I know of,
> probably others. Recommended for new facilities.
>
> 3.16.x, aka "development". No "production" release yet, though this
> will happen soon (after which point my arm will need twisting). Some
> API breaks wrt. 3.15. Most modules build without change.
Thanks, this is helpful.
Regards,
Lewis
- References:
- [no subject] Paramveer Jain
- Re: Pete Jemian
- Re: EPICS 3.15 good for production use? J. Lewis Muir
- Re: EPICS 3.15 good for production use? Michael Davidsaver
- Navigate by Date:
- Prev:
Re: Questions about Data browser in CSS Kasemir, Kay
- Next:
Re: EGU field length vs. Channel Access protocol bob dalesio
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
<2016>
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
- Navigate by Thread:
- Prev:
Re: EPICS 3.15 good for production use? J. Lewis Muir
- Next:
Re: EPICS 3.15 - is it good for beam line Pete Jemian
- Index:
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
<2016>
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
2022
2023
2024
|