having to help Rev (was: Re: Memory Leak on export png????)
dave at looktowindward.com
Wed Mar 21 12:47:11 CDT 2007
On 21 Mar 2007, at 15:17, Björnke von Gierke wrote:
>> Ok, if they don't have enough money to pay me now, then they can
>> owe it to me, and, *if* and when they do make lots of money they
>> can pay me then. How does that sound? I would charge £15.00 per
>> hour, that's a lot cheaper than they are advertising their
>> consultancy services for! Presumably the people at RunRev are
>> getting paid a good salary or if not are being rewarded in terms
>> of shares and/or the promise of money if and when they hit the big
> I do agree with Dave's general direction (if not with the way he
> expresses it).
> We all pay RunRev money so they can produce a good product. It's
> not our duty nor our responsibility to do any testing on their
> behave. Actually it should be the other way around. If there's a
> bug we should get an easy accessible list of workarounds, until the
> bug is fixed with the next release of Rev, of course in addition to
> every Feature anyone requested.
> On the other hand there's the open source approach. Users don't pay
> to use software, they commit time and effort to make the product
> better, so their own stuff based on the open source software gets
> better. Every user always puts equal effort into the open source
> foundation as into his own project. Bugs are fixed within minutes
> of their discovery, and every feature a user needs is implemented
> by that same user within even less time.
> But alas this world is not perfection wonderland, bugs are hard to
> find and to track down, feature additions make a product
> complicated, and aggravate people who are used to the old way.
> RunRev is walking a middle ground here. In my opinion, it's crucial
> for their future to not adopt the worst of both the commercial way
> and the open source way, but to work out a methodic to get the
> strengths of both worlds. That is not easy for such a small
> company, but if they have a clear vision about how they want to
> interact with their customers, then it is possible.
> Specifically, Bugzilla is a workaround for having no clue where
> bugs come from. Customers that find a bug are asked to make an
> effort to increase the product they paid for, and these bugs could
> linger for years due to time constrains. Unfortunately for everyone
> involved, that's how RunRev's software currently works.
> The existing system does not rock in any way. It's a patch on
> reality forced upon everyone by legacy, money and priority
> management, not more and not less.
Actually we started the discussion at cross purposes I think. I was
talking about first level soak (stress) testing in the development
process before the code is checked in, before it goes to QA and *way*
before it gets to beta stage.
> In hopes for a constructive discussion
Sounds good to me!
> Björnke von Gierke
There are more ways of paying for something than money! Even if you
only got a free T-Shirt or free hard copy of the manual it would be
something. There really is no such thing as a free lunch.
Having said that, I really wouldn't mind doing the beta testing for
free on a volunteer basis, but not as an expectation!
I signed up for the Beta Program a while back, but I heard nothing
for months, then a short while ago I was contacted with the details,
unfortunately I don't have enough time now. When I signed up I could
have put aside a couple of hours a day.
All the Best
More information about the use-livecode