David Wolverton wrote:
Hey -- Is this your way of volunteering to help? Sweet! Drop Baker your
information so we can get you set up!
The project, being 100% volunteer, has been through LOTS of hands. If you'd
like to help, you can then criticize the heck out of it.
And if you don't want to help, then let your issues be known WITHOUT
editorial. Is that so much to ask?
There are probably LOTS of implementation issues on getting this out the
door -- This is a VOLUNTEER project -- the work was started in Australia,
loose ends as found updated from the U.S. on a server based in Europe - And
we're on a machine that is 'under-licensed' for the onslaught of people
curious to see what's behind the flap once it was tossed out there - there
really wasn't a way to do a 'follow the sun' release announcement to limit
the risk to running out of seats on a machine that will normally have 3
people a day touch it! I'm guessing many of the issues being seen are from
too many people online at once. There WILL be issues for the first few
weeks/months. Sorry about reality being such a bitch...
REMEMBER -- This is volunteer work being done to make the world a better
place for everyone... Cut some slack for those people so they have incentive
to keep working on it.
Volunteer projects can be rolled out with better browser support than
currently demonstrated. The problem with relying on a specific browser's
features is the fact that you end up building an app with lots of mods
later that can become troublesome to debug and fix when the mods start
affecting each other. Rushing a project to fruition solely based on IE's
features is not a great way to demonstrate any public web app IMO. I
have to agree with the poster's comments on that fact, but I also don't
think it's proper to point fingers and name development methods if there
are no facts to reference.
They need the feedback on what is not working correctly so it can be fixed.
The editorials... Not so much.
Relying solely on IE's non-W3C features is the first bug. If this is
an intranet app, then use whatever you want. If this is to be a public
bug reporting tool then perhaps the initial approach is not the best one.
And really folks -- give it a week or two to settle down. Send any 'found
issues' or 'connection problems' to the group so they can be reviewed -- if
possible, include the time (and your TimeZone!) and your browser used (along
with version). Hopefully with the data they can find out if the issue is
'seats' (and then perhaps can get IBM to donate more!) or a particular
browser is having issues that needs particular review. I can promise you no
one tested this with Chrome or Safari -- no one in the volunteer groups uses
those! So again, if you want to vollunteer to 'beta test' your favorite
flavor of browser, PLEASE let Baker know -- they can always use more help.
Without editorial.
David W.
The problem isn't the connection or the seats. It's the error reporting
and the fact that you can't tell that you have to have IE to load the
home page. Here's the URL I get redirected to:
http://212.241.202.162:8080/db/errDisplay.asp?code=1011&er=ERROR:%20EXP01%20MS%20Internet%20Explorer%206.0%20or%20later%20is%20required%20to%20use%20DesignBais.%20%20Please%20download%20IE6%20or%20later%20and%20try%20again.
The page itself just says:
Error Report
An error occured in this application. Please contact your system
administrator or your software vendor to report this problem.
[Try Again]
Why isn't the real error (in the URL) on the page itself? That would
probably help some.
GlenB
_______________________________________________
U2-Users mailing list
[email protected]
http://listserver.u2ug.org/mailman/listinfo/u2-users
