4.12 open testing

[Fenrir]

Bitterman, you're well off track in my opinion; there's nothing ridiculous about having a small core of reliable and trusted testers to beta test.

Their way means testing among a limited but cosmopolitan range of setups - feedback is more managable in the event of the more prevalent & serious bugs and allows quicker analysis.

It also avoids the hysteria and drama-queen-itis - and there's already more than required of that, much emanating from your direction I might add - that seems to effect the public response towards bugs in a general release version. Also previous massed beta-released have caused some confusion and compatability issues which don't help matters much.

I suggest you dial back on your sense of indignant entitlement; there's a lot of passionate people here eagerly awaiting the patch and it's new features, you certainly aren't the only one keen to get your hands on it.

As for JTDs post being selfish and cynical... ? We're clearly on VERY different wavelengths, cos to my eyes, what he said was neither opinion or conjecture - just fact.

[bitterman]

ok. I see. I haven't played il-2 for a long-long time, so i said not only about my self. it's a common opinion in the big parts of the eastern community (commonly non-english speaking, as you might guess). just fact. thanks for clarity.

[AnpeJIb_23]

Dear pilots, many thanks for your thoughts and comments. However, the question is addressed directly to DT, and we would llike to hear an official response.

With respect AnpeJIb, representative of KG200.

1. 159BAG
2. GOVP
3. SG2
4. AxA
5. RR
6. IronSky
7. ES
8. Trd
9. KG200
10. KG26
11. aviachamp.ru

[TelluricSummer]

I think this time they will do more to integrate with other work in progress ... as SAS team.
This might be interesting since the communities paid and professional development are joining ...
let's see!
and good luck!

[TheGrunch]

I would suggest that the reason development teams often don't go to open testing is that it is not really very valuable for game development, because being a player is not being a tester:

• Most players do not test bugs in a methodical manner
• Most players do not provide bug reports in a structured manner
• Many players do not understand what an "alpha" or "beta" version is and are quite happy to write huge rant-posts about the beta version they just downloaded because their friend told them to
• Or in our context, about how DT have porked their favourite ride deliberately

As a result, even confirming bug reports takes far more time than with dedicated testers because players will not necessarily check basic facts such as whether they can reproduce a bug, or even note down the specific conditions in which they experienced a bug. It's not really worth it just to satisfy players' desire to get a new version early.

[bitterman]

As I have said, it's a wrong approach. Thing shouldn't be done in a such way. Let's look for example at linux kernel. zillions of users use it. thousands of developers contribute to it every day or so. there's a new patch release coming out every week or two and there's a new minor release coming out in several month. and everyone is ok and pleased. so, this is quite possible. and this is the only one example. how it is happening? it's just opensource project. popular opensource projects are developing fast and evetyone can be heared: want to see something new? want to fix some bug? you can do it? then just do it and show to everyone what you've done and it will be accepted if it's really worth it. But 1C do not allow to make il-2 opensourced, although they do not get any money from the target audience. They are just leaving this project rotting from within while they are making money on other projects. and yes, this is selfish and cynical a bit. maybe i'm wrong, but i do not know how to name it in other words. Nevertheless, there is no question in this post. just another fact

[Macwan]

huh, sounds you are really bitter. Wish it will be better in 2013, and btw Happy New Year !

[TheGrunch]

Originally Posted by bitterman

Let's look for example at linux kernel. zillions of users use it. thousands of developers contribute to it every day or so. there's a new patch release coming out every week or two and there's a new minor release coming out in several month. and everyone is ok and pleased. so, this is quite possible. and this is the only one example.

Please don't speak to me about the Linux kernel as if I don't know. It's not a good argument. By the time bug reports reach the kernel development team they have been filtered through the bug trackers of every single relevant distro and information has been collated between a HUGE number of users, so they have been confirmed as a bug, numerous more technically adept users and maintainers of the distro have provided various logs to examine the causes and tested the conditions which cause the bug thoroughly, and occasionally someone has contributed a patch. Not to mention that Linus Torvalds and Greg Kroah-Hartman work FULL TIME at the Linux Foundation maintaining the kernel.

It's not an analogous situation. Linux has a vastly larger and largely more technical userbase than Il-2. There are also developers who work full time catching bugs for commercial distros. Il-2 has a very small unpaid development team and a fairly small, mostly non-technical userbase.

Either way, the argument was not about releasing the Il-2 source under a non-commercial license, it was that players to not make good testers, and this is still true. Don't get me wrong, I would love if the Il-2 source was released, but that won't happen because:

Originally Posted by bitterman

But 1C do not allow to make il-2 opensourced, although they do not get any money from the target audience.

Il-2 is still on sale.