Could you acknowledge, that it got quite close to having no new features?
If you read new items on the release notes, I think half of them are bug fixes done with adding code.
I have to admit Iâm not sure what youâre asking ?
1 Like
I think Norman has no problem in acknowledging that ⌠
two letters missed.
r2 may be the best of a bug fix release possible.
Not good enough apparently:
Lil Mao ? (LMAO)
2 Likes
Was R2 close
Close sure
We have a saying in English âClose only counts in grenades & horseshoesâ
3 Likes
I just had a quick scan through the release notes the 2021r2, out of 179 bugs fixed, 143 of them were either found or introduced since 2020 so only around 39 legacy bugs were fixed, or 22% of the fixes and only 10 were before Jan 2019.
Looking at my open tickets, I have 160 open verified or reproducible ticket from a similar cut off date out of a total of 258.
2 Likes
Your findings and this statement âr2 may be the best of a bug fix release possibleâ say it all right there. No need for any more spin. If r2 was the best bug fix possible and it only really solved a small fraction of the legacy bugs then there is zero chance of it ever getting addressed.
2021r2 has bugs, r2.1 was being prepared to fix some, and one was related to a SQLITE instability, a DB error I consider a serious one. It was marked as fixed BUT NOT INCLUDED in the release, it was postponed. So I consider all the R2.x series a fail and will wait R3.
Well, I see it positive, that new features got delayed and more fixes scheduled.
And yes, everyone knows the pile of bugs is big, but if we can get long term more emphasis on quality, it will get smaller.
1 Like
Positive? Sure. But it wonât get smaller until they ditch the Rapid Release Model for new features.
Originally you had a Rapid Release Model for bugs (the classic model of one big release followed by several bug fix releases).
Then in 2005 Xojo introduced the Rapid Release Model for new features.
The effect? Have a look at this:
For 3 years it seemed as if Xojo could stay on top of the bugs, but then it became obvious that they couldnât.
Urgent bug fix releases have become Xojoâs Modus Operandi - and that is not normal.
1 Like
⌠and I think I can already see how Xojoâs PR department is going to handle this âŚ
⌠have fewer emergency bug fixes! After all, there is precedence for that: â⌠if we wouldnât test so many people then we wouldnât have such high numbers of COVID cases!â
(I leave it to you to figure out who said that and why that statement is idiotic)
Just like Peter Druckerâs axiom; âyou canât manage what you canât measure" ⌠which any engineer would recognize from the M in the DEMONIC process (sorry DMAIC). Or the older and simpler âignorance is blissâ.
Again, no amount of spin can debunk the data. If the number of bugs removed are significantly lower than the number of bugs introduced in every release then no math can help you there to show they are getting closer. It is just beyond naive and bordering on delusional to attempt to justify such argument.
Could a case be made that the relationship between features and bugs is the same from 2005 to 2021 but as the number of features has increased then it just looks like its more buggy when in fact its about the same?
Reducing the pile of bugs ONLY occurs IF you dont introduce more new bugs than you fix with new features
Itâs WHY I asked for a bug fix only release. It SHOULD be âthe same as the prior release just with more bug fixesâ
The new features may carry new bugs with them
Unless they are perfect and 100% bug free
Want to bet on that ?
Maybe we should ask for ONE year of NOTHING but point releases
So in 2022 we get 2022.0, 2022.1, 2022.2, etc as point releases DO seem to be nothing but bug fixes
No. If that were the case then you would have had emergency releases in 2005-2008. Instead - as I had predicted in 2005 when they introduced the Rapid Release Model for features - Xojo has become a beta (and in some cases alpha) quality product. That effect is just inherent in the model, and by now there are the data to show it.
If you just write very simple apps then you might be ok (though that counts using a database as advanced). But that Pros (who push Xojo the most) had to use certain releases for certain apps as some releases had major bugs and couldnât be used - how could ANYONE think that is acceptable. Would you use Microsoft Word if the 2016 version canât do footnotes, the 2017 version canât do graphics, the 2018 version canât do super and subscript, etc?
So why should it be acceptable with Xojo? Itâs no wonder a lot of Pros have left Xojo.
1 Like
I for one am happy that Xojo has put significant focus on bug fixes, I am hoping that they continue this trend.
Personally, Iâd like to see them abandon the stupid API 2.0 in favor of functionality that benefits long term and more experienced developers, I doubt it, but one can hope.
4 Likes
I wouldnât mind seeing releases with new features every 3-4 months, but also have monthly releases that include nothing but bug fixes. So in January weâd get 2022r1, then February and March would bring r1.1 and r1.2. Keep releasing bug fixes until the next release with new features is actually ready, so maybe you get all the way to r1.4 before r2 is ready. At least weâd keep getting bug fixes while theyâre working on new stuff.
1 Like