hair-pulling frustration

[Mark Schonewille]

Really, why wouldn't it be realistic to pay a bunch of students for a 
few hours of beta-testing (or should I say alpha-testing) some time in a 
development cycle? I'm sure they could detect the bugs that every other 
developer would detect right-away, but without frustrating those 
developers because the people paid by RunRev have sorted them out already!

--
Best regards,

Mark Schonewille

Economy-x-Talk Consulting and Software Engineering
Homepage: http://economy-x-talk.com
Twitter: http://twitter.com/xtalkprogrammer
KvK: 50277553

Installer Maker for LiveCode:
http://qery.us/468

Buy my new book "Programming LiveCode for the Real Beginner" 
http://qery.us/3fi

LiveCode on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/groups/runrev/

On 11/13/2014 09:13, FlexibleLearning.com wrote:
> If this were a realistic option, Edinburgh would have permanent testing
> staff. The language, syntax and interaction permutations are simply too vast
> for any automated testing whether by machine or human. As Richard G says,
> ensure your own software is robust with each new version and log any issues.
> The cumulative effect covers as much as is feasible.
>
> If you find a problem, log it don't hog it.
>
> Hugh Senior
> FLCo
>
>
> --
> I agree. I have always felt that RunRev should occasionally hire one or two
> people for beta-testing. They could test new releases before they are
> labelled pre-release. This would cost only a little money and safe hundreds,
> if not thousands of people lots of frustrations.
>
> --
> Best regards,
>
> Mark Schonewille
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> use-livecode at lists.runrev.com
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
>