Jump to content
3DCoat Forums

3D-Coat 3.5 updates thread


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

I appreciate how busy Andrew is. Is it possible to post a date or date and time next to the build, like "3.5.12 [beta] 2.14.11 (and maybe a time)"?

Sometimes some folks find bugs after it's uploaded and Andrew fixes some very quickly and uploads very quickly and I'm not sure which version of the "latest" build I have.

Thanks.

Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Thanks for reporting.

I will fix all this and upload again.

Of course I am trying to test all as I may, so your request about "tested builds" is something that is beyound my forces and warranties regarding betas, so makes me sad.

My only warranty is that if something serious (like this) will be reported, I will fix it asap.

I think what Michalis is saying, is that there needs to be a new protocol regarding public releases. They should first be "filtered" through an internal beta testing process (chosen team of experienced users willing to help spot bugs/issues before the release goes public). Right now 3DC is in more or less a perpetual Beta stage, where the line is blurred between a stable public release and new Beta builds. This is what I was communicating to Stas and Daniel.

The only thing they should see is a rock solid build, that has undergone rigorous INTERNAL testing first. That effectively means the current rapid pace of development will have to slow down to allow time for thorough testing to occur before it "hits the shelves," so to speak.

To provide an analogy...I served in the Army for 6yrs and I understand that often times a commander can get so ambitious that his combat units outpaces his support unit's ability to keep up and thus cause a major problems for the whole operation. Right now, there is no "support unit" (internal Beta team)....and I think that is where much of the source of frustration comes from. The public, right now, IS the Beta team. And many don't realize it, as there is very little distinction between public releases and Beta.

Slowing things down a bit would also allow you (Andrew) to take a breath once in a while (you can take some time off while the Beta team scours the new build(s). No need to be sad about that. :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Applink Developer

Having a beta tester team could be a good idea to avoid situations like this. Quite often after releasing new version there is couple very easily spotted bugs, so if there is somekind of beta testing team to help Andrew to fix them it would be nice idea. Before making the public release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Having a beta tester team could be a good idea to avoid situations like this. Quite often after releasing new version there is couple very easily spotted bugs, so if there is somekind of beta testing team to help Andrew to fix them it would be nice idea. Before making the public release.

It would also reduce the amount of communication Andrew has to deal with on a daily basis.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

I don't see the point a beta is a beta, you have to expect bugs, besides, you can always roll back to an older builds. What would be beneficial thought is to sometime say 'ok this beta has been thoroughly tested by users, there's no showstopping bug, lets call it "stable".

This is not a RELEASE, it's a stable version. That would avoid having new users comming here and saying "I saw that particular video, but I can't find that function on the current version on the website". No ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I just deleted my post about how disappointed I feel sometimes.

I just had some work to do and when I posted it, I found all other posts here, explaining the situation better. Thank you.

I needed two minute only to understand that this build wasn't working. It was obvious.

Waiting for the new build Andrew.

But I have to ask now. Have you checked it first? On a mac in my case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LiveClay update report from Raul:

LiveClay:

Progress has being faster than I initially thougth, 3D principles are the same across aplications despite of its flavours

The face dynamic subdivision with Loop triangle subdivision (and smoothing) is implemented at an estimated of 80%, remaining is few issues with face conectivity but not a showstopper.

I have Implemented also the Star-Flower subdivision scheme for testing purposes but can be usefull in the future too.

Due to the fully dynamic and local nature of 3DCoat the early performance test are quite optimistic, several million polygons are no issues exploting locality correctly and I hope as the implementation advances to further optimize it, also all of this is without CUDA, intel TBB, by pure software solution (the subdivision part) so there’s still room for improvement here

But still there’s a lot of subtasks that must be accomplished before the first iteration of LiveClay get released.

All the best

Farsthary

It's nice when things move faster and smoother than expected.

Greg Smith

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just deleted my post about how disappointed I feel sometimes.

I just had some work to do and when I posted it, I found all other posts here, explaining the situation better. Thank you.

I needed two minute only to understand that this build wasn't working. It was obvious.

Waiting for the new build Andrew.

But I have to ask now. Have you checked it first? On a mac in my case.

Probably tomorrow I will post build and put all my strength to make it really stable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Member

I don't see the point a beta is a beta, you have to expect bugs, besides, you can always roll back to an older builds.

Actually, i do see several benefits. And Andrew doesn't need to completely avoid public betas either. I would imagine something like an "alpha" testing phase followed by a public beta. Why?

Beta is beta, but in french "beta" also means slightly dumb, and everybody is "beta" to some extand. When we see some new shiney feature (did you notice the recent tweats about svg import...), we want to test it ASAP. Then we go download the newest build, forget it's a beta, stumble on bugs and go complain on the forum or simply post bug reports. Then some new user comes, sees how many bugs there is, doesn't even know they were reported for beta versions and start spreading the word that 3DCoat is an "unfinished" application :fool:

Experienced users are more likeley to know when something is a real bug or when they did something wrong. Having them filter the releases would help spot bugs more efficiently, meaning less troubles for Andrew to figure things out, and more time for him to fix bugs and implement new features.

It would help deciding when a new version is ready to be tagged stable. First phase filters out bugs and tests new features internally. Then when enough new features and bug fixes are added together, and the internal testers don't notice any showstopper bug, a public beta is released. When most bugs found by the users are fixed it becomes a stable version. That's how most software evolve, and while i'm happy to know several new features have been added since i bought 3DCoat not long ago, i wouldn't mind waiting longer between version if i know they will come without major issues (there will always be small bugs)

Just my 2 cents on the subject.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

Actually, i do see several benefits. And Andrew doesn't need to completely avoid public betas either. I would imagine something like an "alpha" testing phase followed by a public beta. Why?

Beta is beta, but in french "beta" also means slightly dumb, and everybody is "beta" to some extand. When we see some new shiney feature (did you notice the recent tweats about svg import...), we want to test it ASAP. Then we go download the newest build, forget it's a beta, stumble on bugs and go complain on the forum or simply post bug reports. Then some new user comes, sees how many bugs there is, doesn't even know they were reported for beta versions and start spreading the word that 3DCoat is an "unfinished" application :fool:

Experienced users are more likeley to know when something is a real bug or when they did something wrong. Having them filter the releases would help spot bugs more efficiently, meaning less troubles for Andrew to figure things out, and more time for him to fix bugs and implement new features.

It would help deciding when a new version is ready to be tagged stable. First phase filters out bugs and tests new features internally. Then when enough new features and bug fixes are added together, and the internal testers don't notice any showstopper bug, a public beta is released. When most bugs found by the users are fixed it becomes a stable version. That's how most software evolve, and while i'm happy to know several new features have been added since i bought 3DCoat not long ago, i wouldn't mind waiting longer between version if i know they will come without major issues (there will always be small bugs)

Just my 2 cents on the subject.

Pretty much what I was thinking, except the Open Beta part. That would work fine as long as it is clear that point releases (3.x) are considered STABLE for public release. Sub point releases (3.x.x) are considered BETA, and thus anyone complaining about their not be able to use it in production has no excuse. We all know that using Beta releases (in any application) for production will bite you in the bum at some point. But as long as you have that first line of defense (Internal Beta team), then an Open Beta, followed by "Official" releases...there should be no confusion or frustration.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

More on the "_more on heights/_less on heights".

These only work if you are;

1 Volume - based method.

2 On the Layer which contains the Depth Map.

If you Add a new Layer then it doesn't work on the new Layer.

BUT;

If you Duplicate the Layer which contains the Depth Map and set its Depth% to 0%

then it works on the Duplicate Layer.

Andrew, is there any way you can make it so that you can reference the Depth Map information for the _less/_more on heights

to work in a new Layer without having to Duplicate the Layer as described above?

Maybe instead of creating all new Layers which contain both Depth and Colour as you have it now, you could have the option

of creating a Colour Layer or a Depth Layer and the Colour Layer knows about the Depth so it can be used with the

_less/_more on heights and other Depth related functions, but doesn't actually add to the Depth.

Hope I explained what I mean properly,

T.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I think what Michalis is saying, is that there needs to be a new protocol regarding public releases. They should first be "filtered" through an internal beta testing process (chosen team of experienced users willing to help spot bugs/issues before the release goes public). Right now 3DC is in more or less a perpetual Beta stage, where the line is blurred between a stable public release and new Beta builds. This is what I was communicating to Stas and Daniel.

The only thing they should see is a rock solid build, that has undergone rigorous INTERNAL testing first. That effectively means the current rapid pace of development will have to slow down to allow time for thorough testing to occur before it "hits the shelves," so to speak.

To provide an analogy...I served in the Army for 6yrs and I understand that often times a commander can get so ambitious that his combat units outpaces his support unit's ability to keep up and thus cause a major problems for the whole operation. Right now, there is no "support unit" (internal Beta team)....and I think that is where much of the source of frustration comes from. The public, right now, IS the Beta team. And many don't realize it, as there is very little distinction between public releases and Beta.

Slowing things down a bit would also allow you (Andrew) to take a breath once in a while (you can take some time off while the Beta team scours the new build(s). No need to be sad about that. :D

I'm sorry that I find myself in disagreement with you.

To your first point:

"I think what Michalis is saying, is that there needs to be a new protocol regarding releases. They should first be "filtered" through an beta testing process (chosen team of experienced users willing to help spot bugs/issues before the release goes public). Right now 3DC is in more or less a perpetual Beta stage, where the line is blurred between a stable public release and new Beta builds. This is what I was communicating to Stas and Daniel."

As far as what Michalis is saying is that Michalis doesn't understand what Beta testing is. I'm sorry if Michalis finds this statement offensive as that is not my intent.

He appears to be using the Betas as updates, which they are not. If he is using them in production he is being foolish. You are correct 3DC is in a perpetual Beta stage but only if you choose to partake in it. The Betas aren't official releases.

Choosing to participate is purely voluntary. I will grant to you the fact that many here participating don't seem to understand the concept of volunteering a little time to help improve the product in exchange for availing oneself to the cutting edge in features. In order to alleviate the "line blurring" all that is required is to place a disclaimer on the download page explaining what it is that you are downloading and that you are doing so at your own risk.

As far as Alpha testers go, I would argue against those as well as it merely slow down the process. For example, say you have 2 Alpha testers for each operating system, Andrew would have to take the time to notify them, I guess through e-mail, then wait. What if they are away or doing something more important? He waits some more. Where as the way it works now he receives almost instant feedback.

To your second point:

Slowing things down a bit would also allow you (Andrew) to take a breath once in a while (you can take some time off while the Beta team scours the new build(s). No need to be sad about that. :D

While I find it commendable that you are looking for the welfare of our intrepid leader, I think that he is highly capable of that on his own. He is a grown man after all.

Thirdly your analogy:

To provide an analogy...I served in the Army for 6yrs and I understand that often times a commander can get so ambitious that his combat units outpaces his support unit's ability to keep up and thus cause a major problems for the whole operation. Right now, there is no "support unit" (internal Beta team)....and I think that is where much of the source of frustration comes from. The public, right now, IS the Beta team. And many don't realize it, as there is very little distinction between public releases and Beta.
I served in the Army for 6yrs
So sorry for you. Okay a joke.(I served as a jar-head.) :drinks:

As to the rest, I think your analogy is incorrect. I believe a better analogy would be....Beta testing is a mine field,

if you choose to disarm these mines, go forth with the full knowledge the your commander is steadfastly behind you. If you should encounter any mines, report back and he'll send send help as it becomes available.

Lastly:

Slowing things down a bit would also allow you (Andrew) to take a breath once in a while (you can take some time off while the Beta team scours the new build(s). No need to be sad about that. :D

If Andrew at any time feels the need for rest, I doubt anyone who has used 3DC for even so little time as a week,

would begrudge him time off.

Best intentions,

P. Monk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

As someone who enjoys using each and every update both at home and in a studio, I am not ok with changing the existing "beta" approach. I'm perfectly happy with it and much prefer getting constant updates to the software and being part of the evolution of new features as they occur. Often times new features or changes are much needed and fit my needs at the time and allow me to continue working on something or finishing that much more quickly - or at the very least improving the user experience. Delaying the releases for "rigorous internal testing" would negatively affect that for me. It may work well for larger teams and publicly traded companies where sales and shares depend on that approach, but it makes no sense as Andrew's development speed and bug fixing defies any other software development model I've been part of. I prefer this over being part of any private beta testing team.

No matter how many people you bring on for internal testing they will not be able to expose the software to nearly as many issues as the full user base can, so everyone would suffer for having to wait. I think Andrew's current approach has worked well for him and us and I trust his updates to more often than not be stable and useful.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

No matter how many people you bring on for internal testing they will not be able to expose the software to nearly as many issues as the full user base can, so everyone would suffer for having to wait. I think Andrew's current approach has worked well for him and us and I trust his updates to more often than not be stable and useful.

QFA

Plus you then expose testers to complaints, "How could you &$&*#so's not have caught this. It &*$(@& to my hard drive",

and what not.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Reputable Contributor

As someone who enjoys using each and every update both at home and in a studio, I am not ok with changing the existing "beta" approach. I'm perfectly happy with it and much prefer getting constant updates to the software and being part of the evolution of new features as they occur. Often times new features or changes are much needed and fit my needs at the time and allow me to continue working on something or finishing that much more quickly - or at the very least improving the user experience. Delaying the releases for "rigorous internal testing" would negatively affect that for me. It may work well for larger teams and publicly traded companies where sales and shares depend on that approach, but it makes no sense as Andrew's development speed and bug fixing defies any other software development model I've been part of. I prefer this over being part of any private beta testing team.

No matter how many people you bring on for internal testing they will not be able to expose the software to nearly as many issues as the full user base can, so everyone would suffer for having to wait. I think Andrew's current approach has worked well for him and us and I trust his updates to more often than not be stable and useful.

It also puts a boatload of pressure on Andrew...and as the program/userbase expands so does the number of demands. I don't know how he's managed thus far.

Sure, you say "just hire some help." That means Andrew has to stop and train someone on his code for months and months (which I think he has had some difficulty trying to do so in the past). It looks like Raul may be able help in a feature development capacity, but between all the e-mails and bugfixing/feature requests he gets daily, I don't know how he manages to stay sane.

My point is that other developers do internal testing. Only a small few actually do this Open Beta model, and for good reason. If you want to be able to get those features and all, then you could volunteer to be part of an internal Beta team. What's to stop you? However, reducing communication to a much smaller group of testers, during predefined periods of time would reduce the overall burden Andrew has to contend with, and allows him to communicate more effectively with those testers.

Nonetheless...there still needs to be more clarification as to what builds are Public and what are Beta.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I want to put my vote in for the open system we have now- just label it better for those who absolutely need the most stable version. This is part of the selling point of 3dcoat. I understand every good design is all about balance- so unless Andrew is feeling the strain, my vote is to give users choice to use the bleeding edge feature set if we desire (and not be upset when it turns out buggy), or to keep on stable ground. My opinion is that if the program is getting large in its feature set- might be time for a UI shakedown :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Pimpmymonkey

So I made a mistake, I know. Now, please indicate to me what is the non beta 3dc version.

The first one I downloaded 1 1/2 year ago wasn't working lol

After a lot of complains and bug reports Andrew will suggest me the latest beta, I can't ignore his suggestion, is more valid than yours. Sorry for this. For everybody is interested 3.5.9 is a rather stable one and I prefer to work with this.

Another problem with latest builds is that they have so many bugs that there isn't any reason to report them to mantis. To report what? that it doesn't work at all? To test it where? On a project of course. Impossible.

This reminds me the blender case. I reported so many times that normal maps in 2.5.---6 dont work correctly and nothing happened. In 2.49 work fine though.

On complains like ' Andrew can you fix this move tool problem?' 'this pinch behavior?' 'can you do it like zbrush?' the answer 'describe it to me so to understand' ... ??? ... I'm so sorry. Really sorry. How can I describe the beauty? How can I explain what precise means ?

Now, too many experiments around but I like to work as an artist and a human being. Life is short. What else can I say? So I'm following and developing a workflow that suits me. And sooner or later there wont be 3dcoat on this. There is this possibility. Here is your point Pimpmymonkey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

The one piece that's missing is that Andew (or someone at Pilgway) needs to designate releases as "stable" once they've shown themselves to be free of showstopper bugs, etc. The problem with the system at the moment is that there's no clear indication of what's the most-recent "production-ready" release, and there's no assurance that going back to 3.5 (or whatever is the "version release base") will yield a more stable experience. In fact, often the most stable releases available are a few after that big version release and/or a few behind the current beta release (but of course they're not easily available anymore either).

We just need a "Stable production revision: foo" "Current beta: bar" like other companies that allow open access to current development releases as they occur (see SideFx's handling for a great example of how to manage the stable revision vs current-most beta revision issue).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

@Pimpmymonkey

So I made a mistake, I know. Now, please indicate to me what is the non beta 3dc version.

The first one I downloaded 1 1/2 year ago wasn't working lol

After a lot of complains and bug reports Andrew will suggest me the latest beta, I can't ignore his suggestion, is more valid than yours. Sorry for this. For everybody is interested 3.5.9 is a rather stable one and I prefer to work with this.

Another problem with latest builds is that they have so many bugs that there isn't any reason to report them to mantis. To report what? that it doesn't work at all? To test it where? On a project of course. Impossible.

This reminds me the blender case. I reported so many times that normal maps in 2.5.---6 dont work correctly and nothing happened. In 2.49 work fine though.

On complains like ' Andrew can you fix this move tool problem?' 'this pinch behavior?' 'can you do it like zbrush?' the answer 'describe it to me so to understand' ... ??? ... I'm so sorry. Really sorry. How can I describe the beauty? How can I explain what precise means ?

Now, too many experiments around but I like to work as an artist and a human being. Life is short. What else can I say? So I'm following and developing a workflow that suits me. And sooner or later there wont be 3dcoat on this. There is this possibility. Here is your point Pimpmymonkey.

If 3DC 3.5 doesn't work on your machine,

then I would say yes you have a legitimate complaint.

If Andrew is advising you to use a Beta version for production then we all have a problem.

If however you have had a bug free version working on your machine and you are still using the newest Beta,

then I say welcome to Beta testing.

As for Blender, 2.49b is the last stable release.

If you are using 2.5 or higher then you are Beta testing.

If so, I'm guessing it is to avail yourself to the latest features.

P. Monk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

The one piece that's missing is that Andew (or someone at Pilgway) needs to designate releases as "stable" once they've shown themselves to be free of showstopper bugs, etc. The problem with the system at the moment is that there's no clear indication of what's the most-recent "production-ready" release, and there's no assurance that going back to 3.5 (or whatever is the "version release base") will yield a more stable experience. In fact, often the most stable releases available are a few after that big version release and/or a few behind the current beta release (but of course they're not easily available anymore either).

We just need a "Stable production revision: foo" "Current beta: bar" like other companies that allow open access to current development releases as they occur (see SideFx's handling for a great example of how to manage the stable revision vs current-most beta revision issue).

I have been using 3DC for over 3 years now and in that time, as far as I was told,

the most recent stable download is to be found at http://www.3d-coat.com/, if something has changed, I missed the memo.

I guess we need clarification from Andrew.

The thing that I don't understand and I'll ask you jwiede,

do you have a stable version on your machine?

You are using a Mac correct?

P. Monk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

As someone who enjoys using each and every update both at home and in a studio, I am not ok with changing the existing "beta" approach. I'm perfectly happy with it and much prefer getting constant updates to the software and being part of the evolution of new features as they occur. Often times new features or changes are much needed and fit my needs at the time and allow me to continue working on something or finishing that much more quickly - or at the very least improving the user experience. Delaying the releases for "rigorous internal testing" would negatively affect that for me. It may work well for larger teams and publicly traded companies where sales and shares depend on that approach, but it makes no sense as Andrew's development speed and bug fixing defies any other software development model I've been part of. I prefer this over being part of any private beta testing team.

No matter how many people you bring on for internal testing they will not be able to expose the software to nearly as many issues as the full user base can, so everyone would suffer for having to wait. I think Andrew's current approach has worked well for him and us and I trust his updates to more often than not be stable and useful.

I 2nd this.. I have been sculpting a bracelett all day. I adore 3d coat! Im absolutely awestruck every time I use it. Love to see the new features. Cant wait to try the new E-panel. Thank you Andrew!!

IC

As someone who enjoys using each and every update both at home and in a studio, I am not ok with changing the existing "beta" approach. I'm perfectly happy with it and much prefer getting constant updates to the software and being part of the evolution of new features as they occur. Often times new features or changes are much needed and fit my needs at the time and allow me to continue working on something or finishing that much more quickly - or at the very least improving the user experience. Delaying the releases for "rigorous internal testing" would negatively affect that for me. It may work well for larger teams and publicly traded companies where sales and shares depend on that approach, but it makes no sense as Andrew's development speed and bug fixing defies any other software development model I've been part of. I prefer this over being part of any private beta testing team.

No matter how many people you bring on for internal testing they will not be able to expose the software to nearly as many issues as the full user base can, so everyone would suffer for having to wait. I think Andrew's current approach has worked well for him and us and I trust his updates to more often than not be stable and useful.

I 2nd this.. I have been sculpting a bracelett all day. I adore 3d coat! Im absolutely awestruck every time I use it. Love to see the new features. Cant wait to try the new E-panel. Thank you Andrew!!

IC

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think that most valid point is:

- post as often as I feel good (like now), mark as [beta, stability not verified]

- after several days of testing in forum this status may be changed to [stable] or [beta] or even [beta,not stable]

If someone wants stable version he may wait 3-4 days until getting status and then download. If someone want to touch new cool features or hep to test may download it immediately. During 3-4 days peoples may post there the opinion on overall stability. All "awful" thinngs should be posted right there to force immediate fix.

The most dangerous things for stability are performance improvements and interface/baking bugfixes. It are most "dark" areas.

I will post all status changes in twitter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate how busy Andrew is. Is it possible to post a date or date and time next to the build, like "3.5.12 [beta] 2.14.11 (and maybe a time)"?

Sometimes some folks find bugs after it's uploaded and Andrew fixes some very quickly and uploads very quickly and I'm not sure which version of the "latest" build I have.

Thanks.

Bob

There are no milestones, when a new beta have to be released. Betas are released, when the new functions or bugfixes are stable enough to publish them.

But if it helps, why not subcribe to my blog? I publish every time, when a new update is out. There are a lot of possibilities in browsers to stay up to date. -> 3dcoat.blogspot.com

Best wishes

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Applink Developer

Another problem with latest builds is that they have so many bugs that there isn't any reason to report them to mantis. To report what? that it doesn't work at all? To test it where? On a project of course. Impossible.

This reminds me the blender case. I reported so many times that normal maps in 2.5.---6 dont work correctly and nothing happened. In 2.49 work fine though.

I think that blender bug tracker is one of the best tracker out there. I have reported several bugs there and in all cases they have responded to me in 24h.

It really works. Campbell Barton is one the best bug fixing coder I have ever seen. Sometimes you have to understand that some issues are not bugs but the limitation

of the program and they will be fixed eventually but not now. Mantis tracker has to be updated every day to keep it fresh. Without that it will become a trash bin and be

forgotten.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Contributor

I think that most valid point is:

- post as often as I feel good (like now), mark as [beta, stability not verified]

- after several days of testing in forum this status may be changed to [stable] or [beta] or even [beta,not stable]

If someone wants stable version he may wait 3-4 days until getting status and then download. If someone want to touch new cool features or hep to test may download it immediately. During 3-4 days peoples may post there the opinion on overall stability. All "awful" thinngs should be posted right there to force immediate fix.

The most dangerous things for stability are performance improvements and interface/baking bugfixes. It are most "dark" areas.

I will post all status changes in twitter.

Seems perfectly reasonable to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I agree with Andrew...

I like getting the most cutting edge version of the program and testing out new features...I don't mind that it doesn't work sometimes because he fixes it so quickly. Actually, a similar model is employed by Google, which has been successful for them.

Ready, Fire, Aim

It makes 3d Coat a constantly evolving and growing program.

One thing that I think might help Andrew is if we had a place, similar to Mantis bug tracker where we could post our feature requests and users could go on there and vote for what they would like to see the most. That would allow Andrew to see some ideas from the user base and prioritize based on what is most requested (maybe a system where the most voted on requests bubble to the top of the list) Not only that, it would be a clear place to see all requests at once and stuff wouldn't get lost on random pages in the forums.

I'm sure the excellent web developer at Pilgway could set up something like that no problem.

To clarify, I'm suggesting having Mantis for bug reporting and something new for feature requests...just to keep things a bit more organized.

-G

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Advanced Member

I think that most valid point is:

- post as often as I feel good (like now), mark as [beta, stability not verified]

- after several days of testing in forum this status may be changed to [stable] or [beta] or even [beta,not stable]

If someone wants stable version he may wait 3-4 days until getting status and then download. If someone want to touch new cool features or hep to test may download it immediately. During 3-4 days peoples may post there the opinion on overall stability. All "awful" thinngs should be posted right there to force immediate fix.

The most dangerous things for stability are performance improvements and interface/baking bugfixes. It are most "dark" areas.

I will post all status changes in twitter.

Yep, I think that would solve most of the issues currently being encountered.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...