CuteEditor 6.0 has been out since April.  However, every time I check the download page, I see that the "date added" for version 6.0 has changed.  Currently, the "date added" is July 5th.  What's going on?  Are you guys still updating version 6.0 and fixing bugs and such?  Because I'm not going to upgrade until version 6.0 has been stable for a while.  When do you think you'll be finished updating version 6.0?

---

asp.net Chat http://cutesoft.net/ASP.NET+Chat/default.aspx
Web Messenger: http://cutesoft.net/Web-Messenger/default.aspx
asp.net wysiwyg editor: http://cutesoft.net/ASP.NET+WYSIWYG+Editor/default.aspx
asp wysiwyg html editor: http://cutesoft.net/ASP
asp.net Image Gallery: http://cutesoft.net/ASP.NET+Image+Gallery/default.aspx
Live Support: http://cutesoft.net/live-support/default.aspx

Hello Adam.  Thank you for your response.

The deal is this - I don't want to upgrade to version 6.0 until you're finished making changes to it.  Once you're done making changes to version 6.0, could you please re-release it as a later version?  For example, once 6.0 is stable and you're finished doing updates to it, you could call it 6.1 or something.  That way, I'd know that the software was ready to use, and I wouldn't need to keep checking back every day to see if you made some more changes.

Thanks.

I think you're misunderstanding me. 

If you guys are still doing updates to version 6.0, to me that says that version 6.0 is not finished.

The way that versioning usually works is this -  you write a new version of your code, you test it, and then you release it.  Once it's released, you'd better be pretty darn sure that it's stable.  If you find bugs after that, it's customary to release a minor version update (say, going from 6.0 to 6.1 or 6.05 or something), but this is something that you should want to avoid, as it's embarrassing for you and inconvenient for your customers.  If you think that your latest version still has bugs, you should release it as a beta, so that nobody's expecting it to be stable.

I'm obviously not saying that Adam should discontinue development on CuteEditor.  What I'm saying is that you shouldn't release a version if it's still only half-baked.  On top of that, updating the latest version of your software without changing the version number is confusing and wrong.  How does someone know if they're running the right version?  Do they need to check your site every day and see if the "date added" in your downloads section has changed?  Also, I've seen that "date added" change at least 4 or 5 times since version 6.0 was released.  This means that, had I upgraded in April, I'd have had to do 4 or 5 rollouts of *MY* software just to accommodate your bugfixes and whatnot.

Look, I understand that you guys are probably a small software shop and don't have tons of developer resources to throw around.  However, I don't think that I'm asking too much by expecting you to follow by the versioning standards that the rest of the software-developing world follows by.

You honestly can't see my problem?  Really?

Ok, I'll state it as plainly as possible - the current approach to versioning is nonstandard and confusing.  I have no idea if version 6.0 is stable, or if Adam is going to be doing another bugfix tomorrow, forcing me to upgrade yet again.

And no, the standard way of doing things is not hotfixes, unless you're microsoft or something.  The standard way of doing things is to make sure your code works before doing a release.  If you screw up and need to update your software after doing a release, you should increment the version number in some way, so as to make clear which version someone is running.  Once you have a stable release out and want to add features, you start work on a new version.  Once all those new features are tested, you release a version upgrade, and thus the cycle repeats.

If you really can't see my problem, I guess there isn't much I can do for you.  I would simply suggest that you take a look around and see how other companies do versioning.  You will quickly see that the current method is nonstandard and confusing.

Thank you for good communication.

---

Smartmatic