Thanks for the reply 9Val. That clarifies a lot. See below... On Mon, 14 Feb 2005 00:11:24 +0200, 9Val wrote:
> AY> o When can we expect this next beta release with a minimum of known > issues? > > I think it'll take *at least* 1 week. Okay. > And something common in answer to next 2 questions: > > Current beta is mostly concentrated on new UI, therefore I see. Well that means that I completely misunderstood your reply to Jurgen, in which you wrote: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ JH> I'd say he (and Ritlabs) differentiate between Betas where JH> they software developers already *know* there's a bug here, a bug JH> there, a bug everywhere, and Betas where they think, hey we found JH> them all, let's see what can be found through testing by all the JH> buys on TBBETA. Absolutely correct, most of current version bugs are not bugs (as something that's going unexpected), but known issues. Therefore the next beta will be available when we'll have no (or at least minimum number) of known issues. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ My understanding of that was that a major focus - perhaps *the* major focus - of the coming release was in clearing up the outstanding known issues - largely reported and unresolved bugs from many previous releases and long before the coming introduction of the new GUI. As I misunderstood what you wrote to Jurgen, so my subsequent questions are irrelevant. > AY> o Is there some reason why you want to clean up all of the known > AY> issues with just one beta release rather than in stages, e.g. several > AY> beta releases all focusing on cleaning up the known issues? A > AY> stage-wise approach would seem to be a more efficient use of your > AY> beta-tester time. > > I spoke about known issues in new GUI and don't think that it is > possible to clean up that issues in several betas - program is not > usable yet (even with my basic needs) Pardon me, but I don't understand what you are saying here. But, anyway, like I said, I thought you were talking about known issues in the entire 3.x series, not just the forthcoming new GUI. So my question talked about a stage-wise approach. > AY> o Is there some reason why you chose to combine this cleaning up > AY> of known issues with the introduction of a major GUI change? > > Again, I'm talking about GUI known issues, see comments later. And, again, I simply misunderstood your reply to Jurgen (quoted above). > AY> Offhand, > AY> this seems like a risky strategy, and not necessarily user-friendly. > AY> For one thing, some users might like the old GUI. > > Sure, I'm pretty sure, that we'll have such users, so new UI shouldn't > be introduced? No, feel free to introduce the new GUI. I have no problem with that. Like I said, I just misunderstood your response to Jurgen. > AY> For another thing, > AY> many users might prefer to see the known issues cleaned up as a higher > AY> priority than the introduction of a new GUI. This could irritate those > AY> who feel that the new GUI is slowing down what they view as a higher > AY> priority task. > > That's the major problem - program *always* contains bugs and known > issues. And therefore *any* changes in *any* area will rise just one > question "Why not to clear everything in other parts?". No matter in > which state was program before that major changes, testers will ask > that question. So I think, that after releasing bug-fix-serie 3.0.1, > was the best time for starting work on introducing new GUI. Okay. > PS: do you know, that major parts of NFS Stef wrote 3 years ago? No, I did not know that. I am not sure what your point is either. But, hey, I will store that piece of information away in my mind and treasure it forever. :-) > PPS: program development shouldn't stop. But development process > consist of two threads: fixing old code *and* writing new. Keyword is > "AND". It is not possible to stop writing new features - product will > die, like it is not possible to stop bug-fixing, there will be the > same unhappy end. Sounds quite reasonable to me. I don't think I ever suggested otherwise. 9Val, we just had a small miscommunication here - based on my wrong understanding of what you were saying to Jurgen. I don't know how others read your remark to Jurgen, but I doubt that I was the only one to interpret your words in a more general sense. Anyway, thanks a lot for this reply and the clarification. You answered all of my questions in a very satisfactory way. -- Avi Yashar Windows XP Pro SP2 and The Bat! Pro 3.0.2.10 ________________________________________________________ Current beta is 3.0.2.10 | 'Using TBBETA' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html IMPORTANT: To register as a Beta tester, use this link first - http://www.ritlabs.com/en/partners/testers/
