I think that's fair enough Dennis. But thank you for putting the question out there anyway.
Yes, it's ok, I can wait for issues to be fixed for a bit.
It's ok, but I'd prefer a new update after a bug fix.
It's updated too often, downloading a new version every 4-6 weeks is too much work.
It's not updated often enough, updates should come when there are 2-3 things fixed or added.
Something else (please comment)
I think that's fair enough Dennis. But thank you for putting the question out there anyway.
Hi, there.
Actually, I'm perfectly happy with the update schedule. If it were every two weeks, for instance, I think the updates would have less features and it would make it more troublesome, at least for me (sorry for the selfishness here). However, if there are bugs which are serious enough to seriously impair working with the software (as opposed to just annoying or slowing the user down a bit), then I believe an off-schedule update would be in order. I don't know if such a bug has ever bugged any of the SDS users, though.
So, my vote is on keeping the updates on 4-6 weeks intervals, with an extra if a serious bug threatens someone's usability.
Sarai
Thanks for the input! So basically it all comes down to common sense where serious bugs warrant an update out of schedule, but generally 4-6 weeks for new features to be introduced seems to be fine.
Bookmarks