Fork me on GitHub

Continuing from the Twitter licensing thread from hell, regarding this concern:


If you follow a similar approach of yearly subscriptions where the user gets to keep the software for the year they paid for, doesn’t that solve the problem? I’d only expect support if I’m currently paying, meaning at most you’d need to support your last 12 months of releases.


The problem is that each of the releases in those twelve months (N in my previous tweet) has to work with as many versions of IntelliJ as people are using (the M in that tweet above)


With a pure subscription model for both, M and N are both one, and my life is good simple_smile


Actually, I think I got M and N mixed up in that tweet - what I wanted to say was that if JetBrains have a rolling update model but licenses become perpetual after a user has paid 12 months, then users can be permanently running any arbitrary version of IntelliJ.


And it won’t just be v12, v13 or v14 as it is now, but September 15, 2015 build a12bef94


Not necessarily. Even if there’s a pure subscription model, I don’t expect everyone will upgrade to the last update right away. You will still get support requests from someone who is on IDEA from 3 months ago and can’t update because of “reasons” (say, it breaks something for them).


I have to wait a bit before making a decision on this because JetBrains have not announced whether their release model will change - I expect it will, since the licensing change would make much less sense without that.


I guess my point is… even if they go full subscription and rolling updates, I would not assume everyone who jumps in upgrades in lockstep. I’d still expect you’ll need to deal with supporting a menagerie of versions.


Right, but if it’s full sub then everyone will presumably upgrade within, say, 30-60 days.


I have to assume they put some thought into how the API versioning would work for plugin authors, but they have a history of neglecting us somewhat, so who knows.


I’m not optimistic this will make my life easier, put it that way!


Got to go catch a flight sorry, back tomorrow.


Hello simple_smile My clojure mentor introduced me to Cursive for my first clojure project. Slowly it grows and now I stumbled over a missing feature in Cursive. We wonder if it is already somewhere in the backlog: When I want to move some namespace(s) to a different/new package, Cursive does not yet help me. I have to do all the renaming by hand. Especially since renaming does not allow including parts with "."


Is that planned for anywhere in the future?


Btw: Thanks for developing Cursive. It's pretty useful for me simple_smile


@meikemertsch: Right click on your source file then choose Refactor - Rename. That should do it