POV-Ray beta 22 is now out of date, which means I have to screw around with
my system clock to get it to function.

Could the powers that be put beta 23 online?  It would be nice to have a
functional beta version of the application available as soon as the old one
expires.

Thanks,


David Kanter
Editor
Real World Tech

Post a reply to this message

> POV-Ray beta 22 is now out of date, which means I have to screw around with
> my system clock to get it to function.
> 
> Could the powers that be put beta 23 online?  It would be nice to have a
> functional beta version of the application available as soon as the old one
> expires.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> 
> David Kanter
> Editor
> Real World Tech
> 

If you use a beta version, you will have to deal with that issue. Next 
beta will be online when devs have time to do it.

Post on povray.beta-test for beta stuff next time ;)

Post a reply to this message

Nicolas Alvarez wrote:

>> POV-Ray beta 22 is now out of date, which means I have to screw around with
>> my system clock to get it to function.
>>
>> Could the powers that be put beta 23 online?  It would be nice to have a
>> functional beta version of the application available as soon as the old one
>> expires.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>> David Kanter
>> Editor
>> Real World Tech
>>
> 
> If you use a beta version, you will have to deal with that issue. Next 
> beta will be online when devs have time to do it.

Which (for windows) ought to be this weekend.

Starting with that beta I will be changing things such that after the
expiry date, a warning is displayed which has to be clicked-through rather
than not running at all. Though there probably still will be an absolute
timeout, it will be in the order of six to twelve months or so.

-- Chris

Post a reply to this message

"Chris Cason" <del### [at] deletethistoopovrayorg> wrote in 
message news:47057eb5$1@news.povray.org...
> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:

>>> POV-Ray beta 22 is now out of date, which means I have to screw around 
>>> with
>>> my system clock to get it to function.
>>>
>>> Could the powers that be put beta 23 online?  It would be nice to have a
>>> functional beta version of the application available as soon as the old 
>>> one
>>> expires.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>> David Kanter
>>> Editor
>>> Real World Tech
>>>
>>
>> If you use a beta version, you will have to deal with that issue. Next
>> beta will be online when devs have time to do it.
>
> Which (for windows) ought to be this weekend.
>
> Starting with that beta I will be changing things such that after the
> expiry date, a warning is displayed which has to be clicked-through rather
> than not running at all. Though there probably still will be an absolute
> timeout, it will be in the order of six to twelve months or so.
>
> -- Chris

Post a reply to this message

"Chris Cason" <del### [at] deletethistoopovrayorg> wrote in 
message news:47057eb5$1@news.povray.org...
> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:

>>> POV-Ray beta 22 is now out of date, which means I have to screw around 
>>> with
>>> my system clock to get it to function.
>>>
>>> Could the powers that be put beta 23 online?  It would be nice to have a
>>> functional beta version of the application available as soon as the old 
>>> one
>>> expires.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>>
>>> David Kanter
>>> Editor
>>> Real World Tech
>>>
>>
>> If you use a beta version, you will have to deal with that issue. Next
>> beta will be online when devs have time to do it.
>
> Which (for windows) ought to be this weekend.
>
> Starting with that beta I will be changing things such that after the
> expiry date, a warning is displayed which has to be clicked-through rather
> than not running at all. Though there probably still will be an absolute
> timeout, it will be in the order of six to twelve months or so.
>
> -- Chris

I still believe you will get more testers if you totally remove the timeout 
(dont even get me started on the idea of a nag warning to click through! 
Bad bad bad!!!!!).  Having to keep mucking around with date/time settings to 
get it to run or reverting back to 3.6 is a pita so I for one dont bother 
with any betas.  If however there was no nag, or timeout, I would be more 
than happy to beta test.

Cheers Dre

Post a reply to this message

Dre <aus### [at] hotmailcom> wrote:
> so I for one dont bother with any betas.

  Sweet (but childish) revenge?

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Le 05.10.2007 03:09, Dre nous fit lire :

> I still believe you will get more testers if you totally remove the timeout 
> (dont even get me started on the idea of a nag warning to click through! 
> Bad bad bad!!!!!).  Having to keep mucking around with date/time settings to 
> get it to run or reverting back to 3.6 is a pita so I for one dont bother 
> with any betas.  If however there was no nag, or timeout, I would be more 
> than happy to beta test.

It would simply be better already if the deadline was not missed
nearly everytime by the next beta.
This creates a kind of "stop & go" which is very bad for the moral
and conservation of testers.

And windows users, do not complain, you have a good priority on
getting betas... just think of amd64 linux users...

-- 
The superior man understands what is right;
the inferior man understands what will sell.
-- Confucius

Post a reply to this message

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Warp wrote:
>   Sweet (but childish) revenge?

Look, you're asking people to try out and give feedback on new code.
You're asking them to put up with an unknown set of bugs, a chance of
breaking their system, and a chance of breaking their existing scenes.
Then, on top of that, you come up with this new scheme of punishing them
for continuing to use the code beyond whatever time window you've
pre-alotted?

It sounds more like self-preservation than revenge to me.

- --
William Tracy
afi### [at] gmailcom -- wtr### [at] calpolyedu

You know you've been raytracing too long when you see the movie credits
going by and instead of seeing Lenses by Panaflex it always seems to say
Lens Effects by Chris Colefax.
    -- Ken Tyler
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD4DBQFHBoV5cCmTzQ++ZncRAiwOAKCczvjtOUUsKlk7ycokTK0YAZx7iwCWOlsY
BnTCBLUy6Ulbalsii93O7Q==
=9zFh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Post a reply to this message

William Tracy <wtr### [at] calpolyedu> wrote:
> Look, you're asking people to try out and give feedback on new code.
> You're asking them to put up with an unknown set of bugs, a chance of
> breaking their system, and a chance of breaking their existing scenes.

  That's precisely what "beta" means.

> Then, on top of that, you come up with this new scheme of punishing them
> for continuing to use the code beyond whatever time window you've
> pre-alotted?

  I don't understand what this sentence has to do with the previous one.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message

Dre nous apporta ses lumieres en ce 2007/10/04 21:09:
> "Chris Cason" <del### [at] deletethistoopovrayorg> wrote in 
> message news:47057eb5$1@news.povray.org...
>> Nicolas Alvarez wrote:
>>> dkanter escribió:
>>>> POV-Ray beta 22 is now out of date, which means I have to screw around 
>>>> with
>>>> my system clock to get it to function.
>>>>
>>>> Could the powers that be put beta 23 online?  It would be nice to have a
>>>> functional beta version of the application available as soon as the old 
>>>> one
>>>> expires.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> David Kanter
>>>> Editor
>>>> Real World Tech
>>>>
>>> If you use a beta version, you will have to deal with that issue. Next
>>> beta will be online when devs have time to do it.
>> Which (for windows) ought to be this weekend.
>>
>> Starting with that beta I will be changing things such that after the
>> expiry date, a warning is displayed which has to be clicked-through rather
>> than not running at all. Though there probably still will be an absolute
>> timeout, it will be in the order of six to twelve months or so.
>>
>> -- Chris
> 
> I still believe you will get more testers if you totally remove the timeout 
> (dont even get me started on the idea of a nag warning to click through! 
> Bad bad bad!!!!!).  Having to keep mucking around with date/time settings to 
> get it to run or reverting back to 3.6 is a pita so I for one dont bother 
> with any betas.  If however there was no nag, or timeout, I would be more 
> than happy to beta test.
> 
> Cheers Dre 
> 
> 
Do you know WHY there is an expiration on beta? It's there so that developers 
are not pestered about old bugs that have already been corrected in the newer 
version(s).
I've seen cases, with other products, where bug reports were filed for some 
early beta releases MONTHS after the final version was released. Some times, 
around a year, maybe more, after the affected beta release was replaced by the 
next, whitch effectively corrected that very same bug.
There was several cases when those to late bug reports actualy caused serious 
setback in the development process, as the beta version was NOT provided by the 
"bug" reporter.

-- 
Alain
-------------------------------------------------
42.7 percent of all statistics are made up on the spot.

Post a reply to this message