Doktor Avalanche
personally i'd expect to see some of the monthly updates to be stability-only, 

I was hoping the emergency fixes would do that, that is fix all the regression bugs... Maybe they won't.

pwalpwal
while that's generally true, does it really work with the new monthly rollouts? 4 weeks and the next version's there, so for example, is it possible to install braintree rather than cambridge?

 
If you haven't installed Braintree, you can install Braintree. If you've installed Cambridge, you can roll back to Braintree. I think the whole point of the rollback is so you can download the update and go back if you have problems.
 

personally i'd expect to see some of the monthly updates to be stability-only, and not introduce new features each drop... though i understand this may be harder for marketing, who are "new feature oriented"
 

From what I understand, there are people at Cakewalk who work primarily on fixes, and some who work primarily on features, so although there is some overlap it's not always one at the expense of the other. I do know that stability fixes are a priority so you can keep expecting those. And of course, the content is independent of both so that will happen regardless.

FWIW I think the model would work best if stability/regression and feature updates were kept separate as much as possible. That would require two updates a month though...
 
In "ideal land" for me... On the big day you could release two builds of Sonar...
(Build 1) With regression issues fixed from last months build.
(Build 2) Same as build 1 plus all the new fixes, enhancements and features.
 
User can choose between either...
 
With (Build 1) whilst it's a month older it will at least clear the annoying regression issues (new bugs).
With (Build 2) it's more whizz bang and up to date complete with new regression issues and bugs (but also more legacy bugs being fixed).
 
(Build 1) In fact could be released any time between releases.
 
It will be a toss up for the user to decide which build to take. Generally Build 1 would be more stable as regression bugs are fixed, however there would be occasions that Build 2 could be better as the legacy issues squashed could end up being more important.

Doktor Avalanche
FWIW I think the model would work best if stability/regression and feature updates were kept separate as much as possible. That would require two updates a month though...

 
I doubt Cakewalk would be interested in producing two versions.  It looks to me like bug fixing and adding new features are all part of a single process, probably due to their limited manpower.  Everyone throws their part into the pot and they all hope for the best once it goes out.
 
 
 

It's not two versions.
The code does not have to be forked. The second build would be using the first build as a code base.


At it's most simplistic it's effectively a two releases a month strategy (sequential just like the updates we are getting).. call it a scheduled mid term "emergency release" if you will. I would call it a stability release.
 

Doktor Avalanche
...call it a scheduled mid term "emergency release" if you will.

Or call it a marketing department's dream: "New SONAR updates...now every two weeks, not just once a month!"

Well I would think it would be better to release them on the same day in order to avoid the 'too many releases to handle' complaints. In theory the stability update could be anytime between releases though, but releasing them on the same day appeals to two different profiles of people who will only install one of the updates. That is the 'feature greedy just give me the toys' profile or the 'keep it steady and reliable at all times' profile.

Makes sense no?

An even better situation would be if the the regression fixes were every two months and the enhancements releases were every two months alternating inbetween (once a month release). The cautious would upgrade every two months and the serial updaters every month. Similar to what pwalpwal is suggesting. Of course that will never happen now as the commitments have already been made, leaving my previous post to be the only realistic option.

I would go nuts with core studio software updating every two weeks.

Agreed...