Jump to content

To Be Stable or Not To Be Stable??


DaVrOS

Recommended Posts

To Be Stable or Not To Be Stable??

That is the question....

uTorrent

-- 2009-08-12: Version 1.8.4 (build 16150)

- Feature: Enabled magnet bundles.

- Change: run the 64 bit version of explorer when running as a 32 bit app in a 64 bit windows os.

-- 2009-08-28: Version 1.8.4 (build 16301)

- Fix: Installer crash after download

- Fix: Crash when peers disconnect from a magnet-link torrent right as we received the metadata

-- 2009-09-04: Version 1.8.4 (build 16381)

- Change: Disable Ask for unsupported 64-bit Windows

-- 2009-09-10: Version 1.8.4 (build 16442)

- Fix: Potential crashes with magnet links

-- 2009-09-25: Version 1.8.4 (build 16667)

- Change: Balance CDNs to download updates

- Fix: Fixes bug where magnet links wouldn't work if PEX was disabled

- Fix: potential crash in network code

- Fix: More crashes when using magnet links

So in a STABLE.. they add a new feature which is magnet bundles and use of the 64 bit explorer

THEN then they release another STABLE build to fix crashes with that

THEN they release another build to fix crashes again with the 64 bit side that they just added

THEN they release another build to fix crashes with the Magnet stuff they just added

THEN they release another build to fix MORE crashes with the new Magnet feature they just added.

What the hell is going on here?? It is either STABLE or it is not???

You DO NOT add new features in a stable.. you do NOT then release build after build to fix the bugs that was caused by adding new features in a STABLE. If the 1.9 series is going to follow this format of adding new features to stables and then multiple builds to fix the bugs caused by adding the new features. The chance of Trackers allowing this over and over become slimmer and slimmer.

Now I can fully understand an emergency release to a stable for a security hole found but new features??

I hope you are giving some of the coding team a smack around the head Alus for the release format they are doing things in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the Magnet stuff they just added

Wrong.

--- 2008-07-21: Version 1.8 RC5 (build 11549)

- Feature: Add associate magnet URI button

- Change: Handle magnet URIs

Just because magnet bundles was added as a new feature doesn't mean magnet URI support is new. Read the changelog again. The crash fixes are for magnet URIs in general, and existed since before magnet bundle support was added. Last time I checked, stable builds were for fixing crashes that have existed -- I fail to see what you're trying to prove. You're saying that stable builds are supposed to be stable, yet when the devs improve stability by fixing long standing crashes, you complain? You know, you can't have it both ways.

they add a new feature which is magnet bundles

Magnet bundle support does not affect anyone outside of people using this. That's right, it doesn't affect end-users, hasn't affected end users, and isn't related to the other magnet URI related changes as you seem to believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then a new full release should have been done or the stable should be taken OUT of stable shouldn't it or they should NOT have been added??

And came up after??? which means.. the stable should have NOT been pushed to stable. Which is my point precisely.

This kind of thing is becomming a regular occurance. The final decent build of uTorrent seems to be the 1.8.2 (14458) upx.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And came up after??? which means.. the stable should have NOT been pushed to stable. Which is my point precisely.

Come back with your point after you report regressions to us during beta testing, and the report gets intentionally neglected. Or are you insinuating that we observe regressions, and continue to push known-to-be-bug-ridden builds out as stable?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php?id=58768 http://forum.utorrent.com/viewtopic.php?id=54828

More than 2 months 3 months isn't enough beta testing time for 1.8.3?

Edit: Fixed link and testing time.

Again, the "feature" added was a developer-related change, and does not affect end-users. It's a feature affecting the way the executable gets bundled, not how the application works, or what the end-user sees or can do.

Pray tell, what bugs did you experience with post-1.8.2 builds that you did not experience in pre-1.8.3 builds?

To be clear, we are not saying that newly-posted builds are perfect. What we are saying is that as far as we can tell before they are released and marked as stable, they certainly look stable to us. Your complaints and suggestions aren't falling on deaf ears -- they simply aren't pertinent (or at the least, the way you're presenting them makes them appear as such).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Frion said:

New build of 1.8.4 up fixing some of the crashes/bugs we saw in the initial release.

Perhaps NO "More than 3 months isn't enough beta testing time for 1.8.3?"

It is not enough.

I do test the beta's and have been contributing for many years now. Many changes have come about because of me testing and pushing, such as the re-addition of the build numbers in the client ident or the initial RSS fixes because of the lack of an auto retry on a failed download.

I do not always post my suggestions but sometimes take them to Firon or in the early days had some irc talk and email chats with Alus.

And we are suggesting that you take the time to test the program while it's in beta if you want to bitch about stuff like this.

That is all well and good but that is difficult when things are changed AFTER the program is released as a stable and again that is what my post was about. Additions after Stable - NOT whilst in its supposed BETA stage. 5 builds of a stable in 6 weeks seems a bit excessive.

Edited: to comply with the previous edit, hehe

2nd Edit:

Post a new thread on this and I will ban you for trolling.

It has been locked and I now have threats?? Where do you get off threatening posters who are making suggestions and asking questions and whom have not threatened you?

I am very disappointed.

3rd Edit:

I would have liked to reply to you Ultima but dread locked it before my 2nd edit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Perhaps NO "More than 3 months isn't enough beta testing time for 1.8.3?"

It is not enough.

Yes, you make it sound so easy. It's not as if builds are marked stable arbitrarily. If after 3 months the bug report rate had slowed down to sufficiently low levels, then what are we supposed to assume? That the build is still not ready? Are we supposed to wait indefinitely until you tell us it's ready? No.

Edit: I'm unlocking this to give you a chance to finish venting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"If the 1.9 series is going to follow this format of adding new features to stables and then multiple builds to fix the bugs caused by adding the new features."

The 1.9 series was mostly alpha builds to test uTP. It finally became beta versions when deemed stable enough...however uTP's reliability and speed was still not up to acceptable standards to be called a stable build.

Enough new features were added that uTorrent's dev team choose instead to call the next series of builds 2.0 series...and as such there will almost certainly NOT be any 1.9 stable releases.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Magnet links have existed for a long time. It's not new to 1.8.4. The crashes fixed in 1.8.4 for magnet links have existed since long before 1.8.4, but we've been using magnet links a lot lately so they're finally getting found and fixed. Except for one crash fixed in 16667, all the other ones already existed before 1.8.4.

None of these crashes were related to magnet bundle feature added in 1.8.4.

And the 64-bit stuff was never a crash. The Ask installer just failed to run on 64-bit (though utorrent installed just fine), so it was just disabled to avoid even trying it at all. The 64bit explorer bug has existed for years.

Sure, we could've easily just waited until 1.8.5 to push out these extra fixes, but it's easier to just make more builds and fix them now, instead of having people wait 2 months for the next release.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...