[Suggestion^Closed] Update to latest version
Hi, I'd like to ask if there's a way to always update to latest version? As Vivaldi is kind of young, I'd like to use new version as soon as possible. It's just because in every version important features are introduced, or bugs solved. In current situation, and my proper update management (before every update I backup both Program Files and Profile directory), I update to latest 64-bit Developer version. Problem is that sometimes Stable release preceeds Developer. So when I use update check, it won't find latest version because it's in Stable(different) channel. My point is, that with proper release management, Developer release should always preceed Stable release. So this situation won't happen. But I guess solution for now would be to release Developer release with same version as Stable, in situation when Stable version preceeds Developer one. So it will be possible to update to latest version. This in the case we have two separated release channels. The other way would be to have special option in Stale release to allow update to Developer, Beta, .... release. Because now we only can do this manually. And while installing manually from time to time strange things happen, like deleting of previous version, inconsistent installation programs (in Windows Control Panel) etc.. Thank you in advance for answering/considering this.
I never have a problem. I use the Standalone install and just download the installer to overwrite Stable releases with Snapshots or vice versa. Snapshots will let you know if updates are available.
Or, you can subscribe to the Blog's RSS feed to learn about updates. These usually arrive after I have already updated from within the program.
I know about ways how to check for latest version number. Then for sure I can download it and install manually. Btw I use Ketarin(IMHO great tool) for downloading of latest installation files for all of my applications.
But my point is, we have function "Check for updates…". So it would be nice to be able to use it even in this situation when latest version is repeatedly swap between Stable and Developer release and vice versa. Because it's really contraproductive to check and update it manually using separate way.
That's just the way that different development channels work: Final builds will check for new final builds, while Snapshot builds will check for new snapshot builds. It's not a good idea to have stable builds updated with snapshots. Those of us using snapshot builds know that there might be serious bugs, but ordinary users might not be aware of the downsides of updating their stable final build with a snapshot.
If you use the standalone installations, you can install both channels (I presume, though I haven't tried it).
I use one regular installation and one standalone installation, to have both versions on my machine at all times. When the stable is the latest version, I use it. When the snapshot is the latest version, I use it. Absent any serious bugs, I always use the most advanced version. So that I don't mix them up, I use different themes (dark for one, light for the other) and different icons on the taskbar.
So I think "problem" is that Stable release preceeds Developer one. IMHO this shouldn't happen in proper release management/cycle. But I hope one day we'll get there.
So as I get it for now only way from this is using manual update.
So I think "problem" is that Stable release preceeds Developer one. IMHO this shouldn't happen in proper release management/cycle. But I hope one day we'll get there. …
That would only be true if you think purely in terms of a single chain of time-sequential releases. If you think in terms of stability-channelized sequential releases, there is no problem. The last release in each channel is simply the latest release at that given stability level, independent of what is going on in other channels. Many users simply want a stable browser, regardless of developmental initiatives being debugged elsewhere… other users want the latest bleeding-edge set of features, regardless of side-effects or issues.
That a stable version release may momentarily incorporate a few fixes not in the last prior developmental version will be, at worst, only a very temporary situation for bleeding-edge users that can readily be resolved by the expedient of using both channels on a system (as outlined by @ayespy earlier, and which I've used personally ever since the first stable version release). Very soon after the stable release occurs, a new developmental version will typically be released that leapfrogs the stable version's feature/fix state... and this is typically in terms of a few days afterward, not weeks or months.
The need for manual updating only exists if one is determined for some reason to have only one Vivaldi installation on the system, yet remain at an absolute, daily bleeding edge. Once multiple Vivaldi installations have been set up similarly on a system (settings, bookmarks, sessions, extensions), the only things that will really change much with parallel usage are bookmarks and sessions. Eventually, once a Vivaldi sync system has been developed, even those will be almost trivial to keep identical.
The reality is that, once things get really rolling and the various early-days issues and limitations are more fully resolved, most users will simply use the stable releases, and the more daring will remain with the developmental versions which will become essentially feedback/debugging tools for newly evolving features. Right now, in these early days, feature refinement and fixes within the browser are happening very fast. That rapid pace will not always remain so, but it will still be a good while before things fall into a more settled routine where developmental versions are primarily vehicles used for major feature introduction/debugging.
I agree but only partially. Because we're still talking about Vivaldi, which is one product. Even when you have different chains, these are still connected. I mean for example some features of Developer release are creating to be implemented in Stable release one day. I mean these are chains of one product, not different products. So my point was, that if Stable release preceeds Developer release, it's still no standard state.
Sure in some stage I will also prefer Stable releases for productive work. But as Vivaldi is still (IMHO) young, it lacks some features, that we're eager to use when it's release in Developer channel. So for now I use latest possible release with fixed bugs and latest features. And it's just harder to mix Channels. Meanwhile for tests I use Sandboxed or Virtualized clean installation of both channels, as I can't mix my profile settings and extensions to interfere with problem.
Also 2 separated versions are harder for me to synchronize due to some extensions data that I change.
So for now I will use manual update in mentioned situation.
Thank you all for answers and your insides. Appreciate it and "closing" this one.