 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> In article <406### [at] hotmail com> , andrel
> <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>
>
>>I could be mistaken, but I think the underlying question is:
>>why is there no beta 3 when my beta 2 expires?
>
>
> Real-life?
Could very well be the case, yes. I also have one.
If that is the case perhaps the link to the beta
could point to a page that says 'sorry no new beta
available, try again later'.
Alternatively perhaps even the same beta 2 could be
available with only the expiration date changed.
Andrel
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
ABX wrote:
> some developer was ill
> some developer was absent and is back today
> some developer was on CeBIT
> some developer was limited due to library change
> some developer was in fight with limitations of free compilers
> some developer was ...
> some developer ...
> some ...
>
> it sometimes happens, real life :-(
Maybe the splash screen of all beta versions should have all possible
"developer conditions" listed...blinking...underlined and in italic...
:-)
Severi
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Posts like this have probably made the POV-Team consider releasing the betas
only to a closed group of beta testers.
Skip
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <406### [at] hotmailcom> , andrel
<a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> Could very well be the case, yes. I also have one.
> If that is the case perhaps the link to the beta
> could point to a page that says 'sorry no new beta
> available, try again later'.
That would require time, just like preparing a new beta, wouldn't it? ;-)
> Alternatively perhaps even the same beta 2 could be
> available with only the expiration date changed.
Well, that would actually require more work than preparing a beta 3!
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Among other things, ABX wrote:
> some developer was ill
> some developer was absent and is back today
> some developer was on CeBIT
> some developer was limited due to library change
> some developer was in fight with limitations of free compilers
> some developer was ...
> some developer ...
> some ...
Was it the same developer all the way? Poor guy ;-)
--
light_source{9+9*x,1}camera{orthographic look_at(1-y)/4angle 30location
9/4-z*4}light_source{-9*z,1}union{box{.9-z.1+x clipped_by{plane{2+y-4*x
0}}}box{z-y-.1.1+z}box{-.1.1+x}box{.1z-.1}pigment{rgb<.8.2,1>}}//Jellby
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Thorsten Froehlich wrote:
> In article <406### [at] hotmailcom> , andrel
> <a_l### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
>
>
>>Could very well be the case, yes. I also have one.
>>If that is the case perhaps the link to the beta
>>could point to a page that says 'sorry no new beta
>>available, try again later'.
>
>
> That would require time, just like preparing a new beta, wouldn't it? ;-)
Not if the person responsible for the web is not the same as
the one in charge of the beta generation.
>
>
>>Alternatively perhaps even the same beta 2 could be
>>available with only the expiration date changed.
>
>
> Well, that would actually require more work than preparing a beta 3!
Not if the system was prepared for such an emergency.
But in general (and in practice) you are right.
>
> Thorsten
>
> ____________________________________________________
> Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
> e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
>
> Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <Xns94BDCFC2D93EBraf256com@203.29.75.35>,
"Rafal 'Raf256' Maj" <spa### [at] raf256com> wrote:
> I stil dont understand what is point of disallowing peoples to use 3.6 if
> they realy want to, woould a warining message be better...?
No, a warning message would not be better, because people would use the
program past its expiration. Quit whining about it. It's there for a
reason, and it isn't going to change. (Unless everyone in the world
suddenly becomes intelligent and thorough about following beta testing
procedure, in which case the point would be moot...you wouldn't even be
trying to run the program.)
> It is quite stupid that I have to hack a free ware program.
It is stupid to hack the beta version. Nobody's forcing you to use it,
and you can cause problems for yourself and others. Just use the final
3.5 version instead. Do not use the 3.6 beta past its expiration unless
you have a really good reason to. (you don't)
--
Christopher James Huff <cja### [at] earthlinknet>
http://home.earthlink.net/~cjameshuff/
POV-Ray TAG: <chr### [at] tagpovrayorg>
http://tag.povray.org/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
news:406b0907$1@news.povray.org...
> In article <Xns94BDC9B6C783Eraf256com@203.29.75.35>, "Rafal 'Raf256' Maj"
> <spa### [at] raf256com> wrote:
> Of course, why would you be so damn stupid to download what you already
> have??? Sorry, but to download a beta you know that has expired - the
Ouch... that was a bit rude...
I might have missed something, but if I may express my personal opinion, I
think Rafal didn't deserve that kind of answer.
Fernando
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <406b99e7$1@news.povray.org> , "Fernando G. del Cueto"
<fcu### [at] yahoocom> wrote:
>> Of course, why would you be so damn stupid to download what you already
>> have??? Sorry, but to download a beta you know that has expired - the
>
> Ouch... that was a bit rude...
>
> I might have missed something, but if I may express my personal opinion, I
> think Rafal didn't deserve that kind of answer.
He did:
<http://news.povray.org/*/thread/%3CXns94B036EF6F00Craf256com%40203.29.75.35
%3E/>
Thorsten
____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde
Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> Just like your post about this for beta 1: If you do not want to beta
test
> and have the patience needed for this task, do not use a beta version!
Use
> the official final POV-Ray 3.5 release!
>
> Just my personal opinion, of course.
>
> Thorsten
I think that if you make the beta(s) "expire-able" be sure that the
expiration date is longer enough to avoid this kind of stupid problem... so,
if the delay is over, nobody can de-bug it !
I know, I'm stupid too, but I'm just a pov-user not a
"Me-the-God-genious-pov-teamer" sorry...
"Monsieur, je ne vous salue point "
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
