Upgrade path between different environments (esp RC to GA)

• Dec 28, 2018 - 09:14

(I call Alpha / Beta / Release Candidate & General Available ”‘Environments”)

I installed RC and was unable to update RC to GA, even though (on macOS) they use the same “MuseScore 3” directory, e.g. GA is clearly built to replace RC, whereas Beta and older had a separate directory.

My request is that RC and GA use the same repositories so that one can upgrade from RC to GA. If something is good and stable enough to be called a release candidate, surely one would trust the built-in upgrader to do a seamless upgrade from RC to GA.

If there is a development life cycle model best practice or software architecture reason to not allow this, I would like to know about it.


And at a minimum, the "Check for update" functionality of the RC should NOT say "No update available" while there is clearly one being the released version.

In reply to by frfancha

Exactly. I consider that very counter-intuitive, If it were to be decided that for whatever reason RC will/should not auto-update to GA, the only way this would be acceptable if the user were very clearly told somewhere on app startup that this RC will not be automatically updateable to GA but that the user has to do a manual upgrade (but hopefully we are not going that route).

In reply to by Jojo-Schmitz

Actually no. I can update the Autoupdater config so that RC users will be able to update to GA (with one more installed version of MuseScore3, because official installer won't replace the RC's registry keys).

Btw, the decision was based on a simple assumption. Alpha, Beta and RC are ONLY for the users who are ready to test the non stable (non official) editor. For the ones who clearly understand the consequences of using any kind of pre released versions. This type of users can easily understand, that RC won't be updated automatically and they understand how to download and install official builds to replace the RC if necessary. MuseScore 3.0RC will be updated to MuseScore 3.1Beta most probably which is ok.

That is why internal implementation includes three channels for the update: dev (MacOS only, any nightly builds suggests update if current version is behind current master), testing (both, MacOS and Win, all flavours of testing builds including RC), stable (both MacOS and Win, available for all users).

Do you still believe we need the possibility to update the RC to GA? I don't.

UPD: Added "phases" according to Riaan's issue. If minor releases (3.X) is a matter of few months, it makes sense not to remove RC manually, but keep it for major feature updates testing purposes.
dev (for only macOS nightlies testers and devs): revision1 -> revision2 -> revision3 -> ... -> revisionN -> revisionN+1 -> ...
testing (for Win and MacOS Beta testers): 3.0 Alpha -> 3.0 Beta -> 3.0 Beta Update -> ... -> 3.0 RC -> 3.1 Beta -> 3.1 Beta Update -> 3.1 RC -> 3.2 Beta -> ...
stable (for all Win and MacOS users): 3.0 -> 3.0.1 -> ... -> 3.0.N -> 3.1 -> 3.1.1 -> ...

In reply to by Anatoly-os

@Analoly-os, I think you make good points. The people obviously paid attention to the site to know the Beta was released, so they should be paying enough attention to know the GA is released. I think most of these people would also be willing to help with testing future RC's. This discussion was likely started because a few people only checked for updates from within the program and failed to update to the GA, then reported fixed bugs.

In reply to by mike320

<< The people obviously paid attention to the site to know the Beta was released, so they should be paying enough attention to know the GA is released. >>

Perhaps, and ?

"The people" as you say have been used (and promised so) to have their beta automatically updated, or updated at demand by check for update.
And without any mention anywhere that this could be false, this "check for update" function just ignores the GA and declares "No update available".
So "The people" just think they work on the GA version (if they have seen on there is one) while their are clearly not ; or think that the GA is not available yet (if they don't have seen it yet on the web site).

The fact that the beta (or RC or whatever) doesn't allow you to update to GA and requires a manual download is annoying and should be changed to be more user friendly and logical, but that's not the main problem.

The main problem is the complete absence of any message/warning in the check for update functionality about the existence of a next version, making normal users thinking they are using the most recent and bug corrected version while they are not.

In reply to by Anatoly-os

What I'm wondering if if it is possible/makes sense to have sparkle configured as testing and include GA in the chain?

Speaking personally, I was on beta, which nicely upgraded to RC, but then if/when I wouldn't follow the forum/announcements keeps me stuck on said RC. That means that if I keep testing and/or reporting, at a given point someone such as Jojo will respond to my report that I should update to the release manually.
However, if I do that, I then have to check back regularly again to be aware when a new alpha/beta is available to put me back in the testing channel.

Simply having the GA published into the testing channel as well, but keep your configuration on the testing channel would be so much more helpful.

In reply to by jeetee

It is technically possible, but anatoly-os has given his reasons for not wanting to do it on this thread, which I am willing to accept. Also, on macOS your development version goes to MuseScore 3 Development, which would become a GA install if it were allowed to auto-update to GA.

E.g. as an alternative to auto-update I am pushing for some notification when the GA arrives, #281662: Check for update on RC: "No update available".

In reply to by frfancha

Once the GA is released, anyone running any pre-GA (Alpha, Beta, RC) SHOULD be told that a GA is available if they check for update.
Auto-update can update like to like phases within the same series (3.y.z)

  • Alpha -> Alpha
  • Beta -> Beta
  • GA - GA

And maybe even between pre-GA, e.g.

  • Alpha -> Beta
  • Beta -> RC (Open for discussion)

Do you still have an unanswered question? Please log in first to post your question.