Just copy the new binaries over the old ones and then restart it.
However there is no immediate rush, it is fine to stay on 1.5.1 if you want, unless you are experiencing issues.

You are stating that (the Aur team is busy IRL) is the reason for the slower development (and not the foundation) - however the NLG team is likely just as busy, so that statement can't possibly be true.
This of course does not mean that it is the foundation for sure, there could be many other reasons (A higher quality team, a more dedicated team, a more motivating environment, a better community, better leadership etc. etc.), but your reason for discounting the foundation as a possible factor is certainly incorrect as the NLG team is indeed very busy IRL as well.

Yeah, I love the look of the new page that Rijk has done, excited for the future developments there.

And this is different from NLG how exactly?
Every one of the current NLG team members has full time jobs, In my personal capacity I co-run my own company where I work longer than normal work days, NLG development is squeezed into what little free time we have.

A million points to this man, though I improved on it just a little :p

I speak only the truth.  
A lot of effort has gone into smoothing out the release process so that we can do releases quickly and consistently, if some major flaw is discovered we need to be able to put out a release within hours not days..

In this case it is not a forced update, it is a small update to help with moving the seed nodes over to the new domains, a few other minor fixes and one or two other things. People who are on 1.5.1 do not need to feel rushed to move to 1.5.2 (it is not our intention to force people to upgrade unnecessarily every second day either)

I cannot speak about incidences that have happened before I have joined, however quite honestly I feel that the current complaints are completely unfounded for the most part, at least from the most vocal people, there may be less vocal people who have legitimate concerns but I wouldn't know as I have not heard from them.
I think that these people are still reacting based on things that have happened in the past, and not on what is happening now, I ask these people to let go of the past and focus on the present.

In this particular instance, an offer was made to the community at large, the overwhelming majority accepted it, one or two people did not.
One in particular (LTex) was very loud and vocal about it, and made a counter offer - the counter offer would have involved (a) Doing multiple things in a way that LTex prescribed (b) Taking money from only one person, something that is (at least in my opinion) far more prone to corruption as it lends power and influence to that individual.
Faced with the choice of going with the original plan - which the community at large accepted and was happy to fund with an overwhelmingly fast response - or going with a less desirable plan that came with various terms we were not happy with we took the first - this seems to me reasonable. Roel, on behalf of the team tried to address LTex's concerns on the forum as much as reasonable, however the team cannot and will not be beholden to a small minority of the community, no decision of any importance will ever have 100% backing of everybody.

I can assure you that had the response from the *community at large* been negative and not so overwhelmingly positive, then it would have been a completely different story.

I'm sure we will continue to discuss as a team what we can improve and where as well as continuing to take pointers from the community at large. However, and this is important, for any decision there will always be people who do *not* get there way, and we simply cannot control how those people feel or react to this.

I know no such thing. Nobody can 'own' open source code, especially if they are not even the people working on it.
Ask Oracle how 'owning' OpenOffice or various other open source products worked out for them, the second they bought it the developers all fled, eventually out of desperation they gave OpenOffice away to Apache but still it is a has been with a completely new fork LibreOffice rising in its place.

Unfortunately people leave me very little choice but to become involved (and believe me I have many other things I would much rather be doing) when they make broad sweeping statements about the dev team.
We are very much a *team* and not separate individuals. While I may primarily be in the dev team for my coding skills I am consulted on and we discuss almost everything, this latest decision of how to go forward on the Apple situation, for example I was very much involved in.

While this animosity may have started before I joined, I am part of the team now and an attack (and I use the word attack because really that is what this is) on the 'dev team' is very much an attack on me it is that simple. So perhaps people should contemplate this sort of stuff in more depth and consider exactly who they are insulting when they make insults or insinuations about the dev team.
When that attack contains complete misinformation and lies I am left no choice but to defend myself and the team as a whole.

As embarrassing as I find the ongoing actions and antics of a very small but vocal minority within the Gulden community I am certainly nowhere near about to suddenly just give up on the community.

Sorry I've tried to not get involved in this but I can't sit back and watch such misinformation being wilfully spread.
They will not be the owner of the app (which is any way open source), just the distributor, and more than that most likely the *temporary* distributor, something which they are doing as a favour for us the dev team because we asked them and because this is the best tactic to solve our current app store problemand what has worked for other coins.
Repeating a lie often enough does *not* make it true, it is quite clear to me that you are trying to make an issue here where there is none.

If so (though I doubt it) he is wasting his time, there is no extent of coins that anyone can buy that will allow them to tell others what to do, this is not something that can be bought.

It is impossible to say about the explosion of volume for sure I mean nobody has the information to say who is/isn't buying, as far as I can tell the two are completely unrelated though.
Basically LTex (and probably 1 other person) has placed a large sell wall to make a statement, the trading is I believe a separate phenomena.

I will leave the explanation of why to other people as I don't want to get worked up or involved in silly political games, I need to focus on important things like developing instead. By the way not all of the forums are in dutch, the threads in question are actually English

If you follow the forums you will see that the sell order at 1680 is nothing to do with actual trading, as I said in last post its a genitalia display by certain community members.

The rise in coins can probably mostly be attributed to the genitalia display that is going on at 1650. So should be ignored when looking at actual ongoing trading.

As pointed out above this is fixed in the new wallet, and there is no real reason to transfer the coins before doing an upgrade.
However if you absolutely must do this with the old wallet simply add a line "maxtxfee=10" into your old wallets guldencoin.conf file which should allow you to do the transaction.

Thanks, the main focus of the 1.5.1 release was actually bug fixes and other boring internal stuff (that nobody will appreciate but was necessary nonetheless) which will make things much easier for us going forward so that we can do more releases.
This is just the start of the UI changes and wallet improvements, we couldn't put up with such an ugly wallet any longer so we went ahead and did some UI changes for 1.5.1 even though it isn't initially what was planned.


 

Sync again, if it gets stuck PM me the debug.log, along with your Gulden.conf (if you have one) and any other relevant information.

Short answer, yes.

Long answer: yes, but it makes the address more vulnerable to potential flaws like this http://www.coindesk.com/developers-find-android-flaw-that-makes-bitcoin-wallets-vulnerable-to-theft/ - unlike the android wallet I have a hard time believing that e.g. the Linux or Windows wallet would ever have a flawed RNG as the RNG for Linux has been hardened for such a long time, so personally I don't view it as an actual risk, I would use a static change address without concern - but that is just my personal view.
Whether the pros outweigh the cons in the case of something like the premine is up to the people running the premine and the community as a whole to decide I guess.

Yes, basically.
Except keep in mind that every time you send coins a new address is created - when using the default setup - not just when you create new receiving addresses.
If you only do one transaction a month then your backups are good for many years, if you send frequently you need to backup more frequently, or look at some of the other options I mentioned like a larger pool.

It is a bit more complicated than this. (The backups are not worthless from a single send but they can be worthless if you don't do them frequently enough)

All (bitcoin-qt based) wallets work as follows regarding addresses:
1) Addresses are allocated 100 at a time and kept in a pool.
2) As new addresses are needed they are taken from the pool.
3) When the pool is exhausted a further 100 addresses are allocated.

So when you save a backup, you are backing up your currently used addresses along with (~100) future addresses, once you create more than 100 new addresses you have reached a point where you are using addresses that are not in your backup, at this point your backup is no longer safe, any coins in the new addresses will be lost if you restore from backup.

The big caveat here is that every single time you send coins to a new change address is made and all the money from the sending address goes into this change address, so thats 1 address from the pool used for every send, so you want to backup every 100 transactions ideally..

Things you can do here to protect yourself further:
1) Set a larger pool size in your Gulden.conf:
keypool=5000 (for instance), your backups are then good for a longer period of time.
2) Use coin control and set a fixed change address (be aware that this undermines your secrecy somewhat..) - you won't use a new address for every send transaction then.

Yes, though this is probably something we will look into in future.