I would like to see in the change log how many of the concerns reported as we played with 1.5.1 “RC” were actually addressed.
Please Bricks developers, hold to the industry standards of software development. I mean no disrespect, but this RC should have been called a “Beta” and this release an “RC”. After you do your final testing and the change log is updated, then call it “Release” please.
I appreciate and respect the confidence in which the RC was published but it honestly was not ready to use in production looking back at the results in use.
You would do better to just be more cautious in what you call an RC so that the appropriate expectations are set and we as a community that gratefully supports you can share in the “proof testing” necessary to maintain strong confidence in Bricks that it deserves.
Moving forward in this manner will build stronger confidence with the careful prudent application of transparency. I’m not saying you were trying to “hide” anything ok, but the RC in my opinion was not correctly identified.
Know that I am totally for the success of Bricks Builder!
I totally agree with you, I really like bricks, but I think there is a “flaw” in the organization with the updates. I think most of the users are confused.
i don’t understand their release cycle nor their naming / versioning. seen 3x 1.5.1 version what’s quite confusing. at least for me. and i am not even talking about the RC / beta / upcoming wording.
Yeah, I think it’s fine to leave open. You had something additional to say. I just forsee a stream of duplicate “me too” comments from the same people incoming on both posts and that doesn’t really help anyone.
