Using 2.2.9 vs. 2.3.x

[Paul A.]

I know that nothing is guaranteed for the 2.3.x versions, but at the same
time there are good reasons for running them instead of 2.2.9:

1. If they don't implode, they presumably work much better.

2. The more people use 2.3.x (and report any problems), the more reliable it
becomes.

Have there been any reports at all of corrupted backups when running 2.3.x? 
If not, it would seem reasonable to run 2.3.x  as my normal working version
and revert one level in the unlikely event of a crash.

Is there any information, even just anecdotal, about the incidence of
crashes in the latest 2.3.x versus 2.2.9?
-- 
View this message in context: http://gnucash.1415818.n4.nabble.com/Using-2-2-9-vs-2-3-x-tp2285684p2285684.html
Sent from the GnuCash - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.