|
That's this week, like maybe today or tomorrow... maybe... http://meta.stackexchange.com/questions/4321/when-will-beta-7-ship/4344#4344 Here's why you might care: StackExchange is the software upon which this website (SQLA) runs, and Beta 7 of StackExchange is supposed to bring the external backup or export feature, and without that feature SQLA cannot ever go live. Without that feature, SQLA can't even be heavily promoted. Without promotion, SQLA volume will never rise above the "failure to take off" level. Which is where SQLA is now... working well, but not exactly reaching its audience. |
Follow this question
By Email:Once you sign in you will be able to subscribe for any updates here
By RSS:Markdown Basics
- *italic* or _italic_
- **bold** or __bold__
- link:[text](http://url.com/ "title")
- image?
- numbered list: 1. Foo 2. Bar
- to add a line break simply add two spaces to where you would like the new line to be.
- basic HTML tags are also supported
Question tags:
question asked: 18 Feb '10, 08:33
question was seen: 1,697 times
last updated: 18 Feb '10, 08:33
... or the intended audience doesn't reach SQLA?
Exactly... it's like flammable and inflammable, two ways of saying the same thing. My plan (which could use some help from the SQLA community) is to bombard the newsgroups with exhortations to check out SQLA... AFTER the backup/export facility becomes available, but probably before SQLA goes "live". The backup/export facility is a necessary condition for SQLA to go live, but it's not sufficient.
There is another necessary condition for SQLA to go live... the underlying StackExchange software must go live beforehand, and that's not happening any time soon (where "soon" in the internet age is measured in hours and days)... we're waiting on Beta 7 of StackExchange still.
Has anyone noticed that "SQLA Management" is open about its plans and progress? Compare and contrast that with the [unnamed] Developer Network :)
Looks like an advantage of "very lean management" (allusions to frame or features not intended). Lacking employees you have to talk directly to your clients.
@Reimer: Is that why the big companies reduce their staffs: Just in order to have more need to talk to their customers, so basically to "improve the customer service"?