4.12 open testing

[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.

[bitterman]

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

thnx man, but, please, don't let yourself to be misleaded by nicknames. this one is from Quake II. this topic is not my own initiative. of course, some thoughts are personally mine and some of them are expressed in the manner they should not be, and i'm sorry if they made someone disappointed. but the main purpose of this topic was to get to know if it is possible to make testing of current and further patches more opened? this question is comming from the groups of virpils listed in the 1st post. they just want to get exact official answer. If it is "yes" they will go with "me gusta" face. if it is "no", they will go with "okay" face. that's all.

Il-2 is still on sale.

oh. that's the argument. i just forgot about it. so much time has passed since 4.08.

as personally i understand, the main point of current testing process is the absence of a propper bug report which can gather all bugs with full description in one place, constrain their uniqueness and provide some rating feature which will allow to tell "oh, there's a bug in the bug list. i have the same. let me confirm it and add some comment to expand the plot of the problem" and will show the most common bugs and their debugging state. there are free bugtracking systems online. why just not to use one of them instead of having messed-up distributed testing forums? or i haven't took into consideration something again?

[IceFire]

Bug trackers could work but someone would have to maintain it and filter through all of the responses including likely thousands of non-technical users who are reporting bugs that aren't.

I worked in tech support for 5 years and although we encouraged our user base to report issues and come to us with problems for all kinds of support, the number of actual bugs we found in the product we were using as a result of user response was extremely low (like 2%).

So there is a break even point between having useful testing feedback and just having a wad of unusable data. The forums at least has a weeding out process that occurs naturally through discourse.