On Apr 5, 2005 1:55 AM, Thomas Martin wrote: > on Tuesday, 5. April 2005, at 08:44:00 [GMT +1000] Ian wrote regarding > > Are we presently testing beta software? > > Yes we are.
Sorry, Thomas, but I disagree. The distinction between alpha and beta is somewhat blurred, but these TB releases - judging by the number of problems - are still very raw by any standard that I know of. > > The way I see it, beta software should be software that is out there > > to iron out bugs, but otherwise should be ready for release. > > Don't worry we are testing Beta software. But there is a difference to > the politics of other Software developer. Ritlabs offers beta testing > in a very early stage to test there beta software. That's the main > difference. I appreciate that. Testing in a community is 'normally quiet > more efficient than offering beta testing to a limited circle. Actually, despite what 9Val is saying today, I would like to remind everyone about what he said - and what I think most of us applauded - back in mid-February. I quote: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ From: 9Val <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Jurgen Haug <[email protected]> Date: Feb 13, 2005 1:32 PM Subject: Re: the next beta ? when ? Hello Jurgen, 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. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Somehow, I find it hard to believe that 3.0.9.13 meets that standard. And until Ritlabs releases a version that does meet that standard, I personally have no intention of testing it. Of course, I have no objection to others testing it. Certainly not! Now that Gmail has increased the storage from 1Gb to 2Gb, my tbbeta Gmail account can easily absorb as many messages with as many attachments as anyone likes to send. :-) > > In the past I have been more than willing to run what have been called > > beta versions. At the moment however I am extremely reluctant to do so > > because the software does not appear to be that stable. > > Everyone as he pleases. BETA means Risk, means non stable. I beg to differ. There is nothing absolutely stable in this world... other than God, if you are theologically inclined (and even if you are not). No doubt, betas are not as stable as final releases, but they are not, by definition, "non-stable". Betas simply have new features that still require testing. -- Avi Yashar Windows XP Pro SP2 and The Bat! Pro 3.0.2.10 ________________________________________________________ Current beta is 3.0.9.13 Return | '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/
