I have my iOS released at 2.0 (655), and then came up with a bug fix release 2.0.2 (663). However, in Fabric adoption graph, I am seeing mixes of versions as below:
2.0 (663)
2.0.2 (663)
What happened?
Related
I have a project that uses Python.Net for which I specify to customers that they need 'Python 3.6 or later'. However, when for example, Python 3.10 becomes the current default download from Python.org, does this mean that there will be a period of time where my applicaion won't work because Python.Net hasn't been updated to work with Python 3.10?
Or do I have to tell customers an upper bound value for the required Python verion?
That strongly depends on how are you distributing Python.NET.
If you are shipping Python.NET before 3.0 (3.0 has not been released yet) with your .NET app, it can only work with the specific python version it has been built for.
If you are asking users to install Python.NET using pip, I think it is possible to do it from source, in which case it should work with any Python 3.6+. You can check that by installing Python 3.10 preview and trying from there. Wheels of course are only built for existing python versions.
Python.NET 3.0 should be able to support future Python 3.x versions once released. But right now it is in flux, and the next release might take 6-12 months: many features are still being developed and/or reworked.
Redis release cycle page states
Support
Older versions are not supported as we try very hard to make the Redis API mostly backward compatible. Upgrading to newer versions is usually trivial.
For example, if the current stable release is 2.6.x, we accept bug reports and provide support >for the previous stable release (2.4.x), but not for older ones such as 2.2.x.
When 2.8 becomes the current stable release, the 2.6.x will be the oldest supported release.
Does this mean that currently supported versions are 6.0 (latest stable version 6.0.6) and 5.0 (previous stable version 5.0.9), and older versions such as (4.0.x, 3.2.x, 2.8.x) are not supported?
Thanks in advance.
I am looking at Nexus 3.00 OSS Edition.
The recent release of Nexus 3.0 (OSS Edition) seems to have dropped support for rpms.
I don't see any specific note declaring that they are going to be dropping some features from 2.x.
So i am not sure whether the rpm/ yum repositry support is actually removed Or is it being supported differently with the new Nexus 3.0 or this feature has been made exclusive for the Paid version.
Not yet. The progress of this can be tracked in http://issues.sonatype.org/browse/NEXUS-10191. Feel free to watch for release details.
We are using Worklight enterprise 6.2 with fix packs and we are planning to upgrade to 6.3 in the next month (beginning of May 2015). However, we see now that IBM is about to release MFP 7.
Can you please clarify to me those queries:
What is the impact on the project which has been developed on version 6.2 to be moved to 6.3 or 7?
What is the recommendation for us in terms of upgrading, should we go immediately to WL7 or to 6.3 first?
We are very close to the production and our concern that the WL7 "might" be unstable or contains issues that we might face in a critical time."Feedback would be appreciated"
MobileFirst Platform Foundation 7.0 is not about to be released - it is already released.
Lots of changes in both 6.3 and 7.0. Read the documentation to see what's changed...
6.3: http://www-01.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSHS8R_6.3.0/com.ibm.worklight.getstart.doc/start/c_release_notes.html
7.0: http://www-01.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/SSHS8R_7.0.0/com.ibm.worklight.getstart.doc/start/c_release_notes.html
In terms of your project structure, starting 6.3 the adapter thread pool has been removed and you are now in complete control of it. Your adapter XML will be upgraded to the new structure.
In terms of technology, starting 7.0 there is REST support together with a new authentication mechanism - OAuth. Classic authentication is as before and is still there. There are also now Java adapters in addition to JavaScript adapters, and lots more.
7.0 is indeed new, but provides you with a lot of new possibilities.
6.3 is very stable (that is not to say that 7.0 is not stable, but it's also very new).
We cannot decide for you if to upgrade or not, it sounds like you are already considering the right things to consider.
Read about the two releases.
I'd like to get the latest Mono 2.x version.
According to the official Mono release history page it is 2.10.9
According to what appears to be the official archive it is 2.11.4
However the latest modification date in the archive above for a 2.X release actually belongs to 2.10.12
There is no mentioned of the latter two versions in Mono's website (according to Google at least).
Any ideas what's going on?
I found this blog post that suggests 2.11.4 may be an Alpha release (see the comments). Perhaps the same is true for 2.10.12, and the latest stable version was indeed 2.10.9?
A similar questions arises for the latest version of MonoDevelop supporting Mono 2.X.
According to a Xamarin rep in their mailing list it is 2.8.6.5, but the GitHub release history shows 2.9.6, and the following link works: http://download.xamarin.com/monodevelop/Mac/MonoDevelop-2.9.5.dmg.
Is it again a case of an Alpha / Beta release ?
Mono 2.10.12 is the latest stable 2.x release (although 2.10.10, 2.10.11, and 2.10.12 were really just MacOS-specific releases, iirc).
Mono 2.11.x releases were previews for Mono 3.0.
The latest stable 2.x release of MonoDevelop was 2.8.6.5.
MonoDevelop 2.9.x releases were previews for 3.0.
At the time, we used the same version scheme as the Linux kernel for both Mono and MonoDevelop, where an even minor version meant stable and an odd minor version meant development/unstable/preview/alpha/whatever-you-want-to-call-it.
I think Mono still uses the same version scheme, but MonoDevelop no longer does (starting with 5.0). For example, MonoDevelop 5.1 is stable even though the minor version number is odd.