'Community Beta' has lost its way

Mon May 14 07:47:16 EDT 2007

Bernard,

My apologies for not giving you a direct response to your email of two weeks 
ago yet.

In an announcement to beta test members, I requested from the community 
their "top 5" bugs. This resulted in SCORES of responses from a beta 
community of nearly 600 members. For each email sent to me, I had to:

- Read it
- Try to see if the bug was already reported in Bugzilla/RQCC
- If it wasn't, write up a new bug covering that item
- If it was, record the issue both in RQCC and in a separate system I'm 
using to help prioritize what we're working on.

Not all users were kind enough to supply a bug number -- and they didn't 
have to. The point was to provide a channel (if only for one time only) for 
them to get out what was on their mind to someone who would/could do 
something about it -- without having to go through the structure of a bug 
report or using a system they might not like very much.

The "Top 5" process has resulted in more than 300 items submitted and 
ultimately about 134 entries in RQCC being "touched." This has taken 
something more than about 30 hours of work... so far.

I asked people to send me their top 5 bugs, and I did contact many people 
about what they wrote me, but there's no way I invited -- NOR could I 
handle -- a hundred discreet dialogs on the topics. I'll grant you I could 
have supplied an auto-responder, "thanks for your top five bugs" but it was 
actually my intent to provide a thorough status update on the initiative 
within 30 days of asking for the information.

Now, as for the Open Beta losing its way...

You can have your choice of Rev throwing together something, labeling it 
2.7.5 and being done with it... or waiting for 2.9 to be released with some 
serious progress on quality and stability.

You can either have the Altuit technology released now in a reasonably 
integrated form, with the syntax you'll need to use going forward, and some 
spiffed up documentation and sample stacks... or you can wait indefinitely 
while every single open bug in Bugzilla sits ahead of that in priority.

You can either have a retail version of Rev that runs properly on Windows 
Vista, or keep a Vista-compatible version of Rev in beta until a Linux 
version is ready. (No dessert till you finish your dinner?)

I was involved in the decision to rename the "2.7.5" milestone and happen to 
personally agree with the release strategy that was chosen. Version 2.8.0 
replaced 2.7.4 and was a much better product for both current and new users. 
The Vista functionality was absolutely essential to have available to 
everyone. And we are also nearing the 2.8.1 release, which will greatly 
enhance the value of Rev with hundreds of additional fixes and solid 
integration of the Altuit externals, with proper documentation and nice 
sample stacks.

As for 2.9, as covered in subsequent newsletter articles and many previous 
posts to the use-rev list, NOTHING has changed except the version label.

By the way, according to the survey we JUST sent out (the second in a series 
in which we ask for direct feedback), the vast majority of beta testers find 
the communication to be Good or Excellent and urge us to continue on the 
road we're on -- taking our time to make sure quality is addressed carefully 
and thoroughly.

Bill

"Bernard Devlin" 
<revolution at knowledgeworks.plus.com> wrote in 
message news:61E7FEBB-07B0-4657-9642-86ADCA7B8C15 at knowledgeworks.plus.com...
> Hi Heather,
>
> I emailed Bill (bill.marriott at runrev.com) 
> about this on 28th April,  specifically in response to him asking for our 
> top 5 outstanding bug  issues in 2.8.1.  A few days later someone pointed 
> out on the list  that their email to Bill bounced.  Mine had not bounced, 
> and I was  not specifically expecting a reply from him (unless of course 
> my  outstanding issues were not going to be addressed, and I would hope 
> that he would have the courtesy in that situation to inform me why). 
> However, to make sure that he got my email, I forwarded that email to  him 
> again on 1st May.  In neither case did I receive any message  saying my 
> email had bounced, nor did I hear that this bug would not  be addressed.
>
> As there had been no response from Bill, I posted to the Beta Forum 
> (http://forums.runrev.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php? 
> t=733&sid=a27c044d3a76fc1f95dd22bafe1868f5), which is supposedly 
> monitored by Bill and by Robin Miller.  But no response from either.
>
> I subsequently added my comments to that bug in Bugzilla, to make  sure 
> that there was some obvious sign of activity with that bug  report.  I 
> also wrote to the user list about this outstanding bug  (29th April), and 
> got several other users to add votes for it, in an  attempt to get Runrev 
> to pay some attention to it.
>
> On 5th May I had still seen no response from anyone at Runrev.  So I 
> asked once again in the Beta forum (http://forums.runrev.com/phpBB2/ 
> viewtopic.php?t=748).  This was the last posting in that beta forum.   But 
> still no response from anyone at Runrev.  It's quite clear that  no-one at 
> Runrev is even monitoring the Community Beta forum.
>
> You might well say that 'there is every likelihood' that it will be  fixed 
> for 2.9', yet there is no explanation as to why this bug was  not included 
> in 2.8.1 (Marcus accepted it as a 'blocker' level bug  almost 14 months 
> ago).  Going off the time from 2.7.4-2.8.1, it looks  like this bug will 
> not be fixed for another 6 months, if ever.
>
> Since I've tried over several weeks to draw attention to this bug via  4 
> different routes involving *.runrev.com, with no response until my 
> desperate post to the list today, what else am I to conclude but that  the 
> 'Community Beta' has lost its way?  I've done everything asked of  me by 
> Runrev in this process, and until today Runrev has chosen to  ignore me.
>
> It's pathetic that the bug that most affects me is being ignored,  given 
> the times I've defended Runrev in public when people have  railed against 
> the bugginess of Revolution.  Instead I receive weekly  emails from 
> Runrev's 'Quality Manager' asking me to let him know what  outstanding 
> bugs are issues for me.
>
> Bernard
>
>> Dear Bernard,
>>
>> I'm sorry you are experiencing frustration.
>>
>> We are fully committed to the path outlined for the 2.7.5/2.8.1/2.9
>> release series.
>>
>> I've looked at the bug you are referring to, and see that it has been
>> seen and confirmed by Marcus. Evidently it could not be fixed for
>> 2.8.1, there is every likelihood it will be fixed for 2.9.
>>
>> I'm puzzled that you say you have emailed Bill and not received a
>> reply. In my experience Bill is extremely punctilious about
>> responding to email, and my first reaction would be to ask whether
>> there could be an email issue, maybe somebody's email is getting
>> stuck somewhere?
>>
>> Lets take this offlist while we try to determine what is going on
>> with that - email me in support at runrev.com.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Heather
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your 
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
> 