Release 6.7.4 Stable / 7.0.4 Stable Message-ID: <5527E7DF.20108 at gmail.com>

Richmond richmondmathewson at gmail.com
Fri Apr 10 15:07:32 EDT 2015


On 10/04/15 21:52, Terry Dennis wrote:
> Richmond: re: I donated some money to the Open Source Kickstarter campaign (and would again) for the simple reason that the amount I donated was less than a commercial licence would have cost me.
>
> Likewise.
>
> I haven’t followed any of the Open-Source “enhancements”, primarily because my LC needs are already (mostly) supported with the existing LC feature set being used in a Windows desktop environment (soon to be expanded to Android and beyond).  I don’t have the time nor patience to be among the first to use new features, only to stumble over new bugs.  Let somebody else be the pioneer.  I don’t know whether the bugs showing up in 7.x and later are related to Open-Source, or if they are a result of RunRev developers’ fiddling.  As part of my support of Open-Source, I expected there to be some tight control over changes.  Whether those controls are in place, I don’t know.  But, I *do* know that it would be impossible to create a stable version without those controls.
>
> I can understand a new language environment (Rev/LC) to be unstable, with the need for extensive testing by anybody and everybody.
>
> However, LC is *not* a new language environment.  It has been around for years.  Granted, there has been a lot of pressure put on the development crew to bring the product up to date with environments and *stable* features expected to be in those environments.

The RunRev development crew put the pressure on themselves.

Now they need to retrench.

>    Note, in particular, the word “stable”.
>
> Which brings us back to testing.
>
> Somebody, somewhere broke “file eof” processing in 7.0.  That, to me, is unconscionable.  There should have been a test suite set up eons ago to test all the possible scenarios where a script could encounter “eof”.  There ain’t that many of them.  Any time there is a change in a type of file processing, an entire suite of test scripts should be run to validate that the change both provides the expected result AND also doesn’t break existing code.
>
> A comprehensive suite of tests that exercises every verb in combination with every other verb is not likely to happen.  The complexity of the relatively simple math problems spoken on this thread recently is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to LC.  More like the TIP of the tip of the iceberg.
>
> I think we all agree on the main point here.  We need STABLE releases of LC.
>
> The question is, what do we do about it?
>
> Or, maybe the question should be  ... what CAN we do about it?

Well, RunRev keep protesting how much they listen to their end-users . . .

May be if enough people "shout" loud enough that may actually come true.

Richmond.

>
> TED
> _______________________________________________
> 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





More information about the Use-livecode mailing list