We're currently at 10.3.1 and using DR for QA-QC, we're planning to migrate directly to 10.6.1. We use a single REV unversioned schema with a DB role having permission to access the REV.foo tables; we don't have schema for every user as the documentation implies you should. Users are allowed in the role as they take up versioned editing inside a customised environment using DR.
On our dev environment, when we upgraded a client to 10.6.1 to start testing of our editing environment, it then complained that the reviewer workspace needed upgrading. When we did that and it stopped mucking around in the schema (existing sessions were retained thankfully) it worked for the 10.6.1 client, but not for 10.3.1 clients any more, which gave a similar error and option, I think to downgrade Reviewer back to 10.3.1 standard.
So, as we have a large number of editors and it is not practically possible to get everyone migrated overnight to 10.6.1, is is possible to have two sets of Reviewer schema, say REV103 and REV106, with user permissions to each one dependant on which client version they have installed?
PS: We have one production database. I realise we could stand up say another database for 10.6 and migrate edit datasets and users from one to the other over time. However this is considerably more work than either just migrating everyone or adopting two reviewer schema (we haven't seen any other issues of 10.6.1 clients working on the same GDB) and there are also licensing issues/costs involved with doing that.
