I'm not going to argue that there are still too many unresolved bugs. There are.
However, there are several facts that seem to be overlooked, ignored, discounted, or chosen selectively by some: 1) RQCC is not authoritative. - There are many open reports that are fixed but not actually marked as such. - There are many reports miscategorized. Such as those marked "critical" just because someone thought this would get more attention or was critical *for them* but are not actually critical in the sense of data loss or crashing. - Not all bugs are created equal. Some affect most users; some affect only a small number of users. Choosing what to work on first is part of the quality improvement process. - A substantial number bugs are discovered and fixed within the development process without ever being reported in RQCC. - Human/time limitations have prevented 100% comprehensive logging of activity in the system. Engineers have looked at issues that are still marked "unconfirmed" for example. There is steady effort to improve on this aspect. 2) No one ever said we're done. - The version is "2.8.1" not "2.9" - Linux support has been going on quietly behind the scenes throughout the open beta period. Many bugs are caused by code which is specifically being targetted for Linux, and those will resolve with the new engine. It makes no sense to fix/test those changes twice. - Many other "generic" bug fixes -- ones that do not depend on Linux specifically -- are still in process and will be seen over the next series of betas. - Even when version 2.9 is released, it will still have bugs. Every product more complex than a coffee mug has bugs. - Some bugs are next to inscrutable. All are submitted by users who do not have formal training in testing or bug reporting. Every report is a considerable effort to understand, reproduce, and research, even if it's written well. It's a significant effort to work through RQCC items no matter how you slice it. - The pace of bug fixing may not please everyone, but it is proceeding slowly and steadily. 3) Revolution 2.8.1 is a marked improvement over previous versions. - 240+, 430+, 753+ -- There have been a lot of numbers thrown around. Whatever number you choose for resolved/fixed bugs, it numbers in the hundreds. RunRev marketing materials use the most conservative number, by design. - The effectiveness of the process is best demonstrated by the perceived quality as reported by users. This has been overwhelmingly positive. - The surveys back it up in a more empirical way, with EVERY measurement showing a 15% to 20% improvement over the baseline Beta 1 survey, and in many cases far exceeding that. - More users than ever before, a solid majority, rate 2.8.1 as preferred over 2.6.1 (which I think is fair to say was the previous standard of stability). - The integration of the new externals, especially the Browser and Database facilities, addresses many enhancement requests and provides solutions to previously impossible needs. They are definitely about Quality. 4) The "Open Beta" process is working well and going in the right direction. - We have more users than ever enrolled in the RQCC. - Those users are more active than ever before, filing more reports and comments. - We have more beta testers than we ever have. Nearly 550, with more applications coming in regularly. - Those testers have had a longer test period -- nearly six months -- to work with the product than ever before. - The overwhelming majority of survey respondents rate the beta test emails (96%) and thoroghness of communications (87%) as Good or Excellent. - RunRev made a major investment of time/resources to dramatically improve the beta test experience with the release of the new RQCC at the beginning of the Open Beta. - Far from being "secretive" the RQCC is open to everyone, whether they are a paying customer or not, enabling the kind of review of warts we're seeing in this thread. 5) It is worthwhile to participate, RunRev is listening. - The RQCC is a friendly, usable system which essentially did not exist before Open Beta. (We had Bugzilla but that was virtually unusable.) - Engineers are more engaged in the bug reporting, research, feedback, and fixing process than ever before. - The "Open Beta" is an effective way to uncover problems in the software before major versions are shipped. It did not exist before November. - The surveys measuring satisfaction have never been conducted before. The results from survey #1 were eye-opening. The results from survey #2 are vastly improved, but still not where they should be. There will be additional betas and additional opportunity for constructive feedback that is truly read and considered. - We've never before asked a large group of users to submit their "Top Five" issues directly to a human without going through the bug reporting or voting rigmarole... but that's exactly what we did with the Open Beta group. - It is RunRev itself that has shined the light on quality with these and other initiatives, both visible and behind-the-scenes. - RunRev is still committed to a even-better Revolution 2.9 release, and the measures above are the best way to make it happen. _______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list [email protected] Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences: http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
