Testing before 1.0.0

Anything related to PR, release planning and any other non-technical idea how to move the project forward should be discussed here.
silentthief
Posts: 429
Joined: 18 Apr 2013, 01:20
Location: Currently traversing the Ascadian Isles

Re: OpenMW 0.25.0

Post by silentthief » 24 May 2013, 18:45

When you have it "beta" and considered feature complete you will most likely have a *ton* of MW fans who will jump on the bandwagon and try it out. it would be unrealistic to have no bugs, but the hope and hype generated by feature complete will be a huge draw. I'm sure that there will be more than enough bugtesters then, and it would be fans who should be forgiving of bugs considering how well original MW worked out-of-the-box.

just my opinion
ST the opinionated
ps, I couldn't care less about which way the numbering goes, tho...
"You like to dance close to the fire, don't you?."

User avatar
raevol
Posts: 3076
Joined: 07 Aug 2011, 01:12
Location: Caldera

Re: OpenMW 0.25.0

Post by raevol » 24 May 2013, 20:35

silentthief wrote:When you have it "beta" and considered feature complete you will most likely have a *ton* of MW fans who ... should be forgiving of bugs considering how well original MW worked out-of-the-box
This. And if you call it "release" instead of beta, they're not going to be forgiving of bugs. And yes, release will have bugs no matter what, but if it's super buggy and we never did a beta, we only have ourselves to blame.

User avatar
sirherrbatka
Posts: 2159
Joined: 07 Aug 2011, 17:21

Re: OpenMW 0.25.0

Post by sirherrbatka » 24 May 2013, 21:18

0.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999 prepreprepre gamma.

User avatar
TorbenC
Posts: 146
Joined: 26 Aug 2012, 23:13

Re: OpenMW 0.25.0

Post by TorbenC » 24 May 2013, 22:57

raevol wrote:
silentthief wrote:When you have it "beta" and considered feature complete you will most likely have a *ton* of MW fans who ... should be forgiving of bugs considering how well original MW worked out-of-the-box
This. And if you call it "release" instead of beta, they're not going to be forgiving of bugs. And yes, release will have bugs no matter what, but if it's super buggy and we never did a beta, we only have ourselves to blame.
I guess you and I are in the minority. :P

jhooks1
Posts: 780
Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 21:34

Re: OpenMW 0.25.0

Post by jhooks1 » 24 May 2013, 23:06

imho 1.0 should be as good as the original engine. It should look polished, perform well, and appear to most people as bug free. With this in mind, it may take a few more releases after the feature complete release to get to 1.0. I think it would be worth it though.

EDIT: Personally, I don't know if I will make a real play through of it until it gets to this point.

User avatar
psi29a
Posts: 4852
Joined: 29 Sep 2011, 10:13
Location: Belgium
Gitlab profile: https://gitlab.com/psi29a/
Contact:

Re: OpenMW 0.25.0

Post by psi29a » 24 May 2013, 23:55

Really guys... are we that anal retentive? I have never.. not once, seen an "1.0" release not contain any bugs... hence the joke "inclusive bugs" plus a smiley face. There will come a time when Zini has to pull that trigger and get us over that mental barrier.

jhooks1
Posts: 780
Joined: 06 Aug 2011, 21:34

Re: OpenMW 0.25.0

Post by jhooks1 » 25 May 2013, 00:02

The original MW engine had bugs. I am not saying 1.0 has to be free of bugs. I am just saying it should be around the same caliber of the original engine.

User avatar
raevol
Posts: 3076
Joined: 07 Aug 2011, 01:12
Location: Caldera

Re: OpenMW 0.25.0

Post by raevol » 25 May 2013, 00:48

BrotherBrick wrote:Really guys... are we that anal retentive? I have never.. not once, seen an "1.0" release not contain any bugs... hence the joke "inclusive bugs" plus a smiley face. There will come a time when Zini has to pull that trigger and get us over that mental barrier.
Again, nobody thinks we are going to have a bug-free 1.0 release. What we're asking for is a tested 1.0 release. If we want to limit the testing time so that we don't delay the release, that's fine. I totally agree that we have to pull the trigger at some point, if we tried to fix every bug we would never release, no developer writes perfect code.

I'm just asking that we wait to post "ZOMG 1.0" all over the internet until we've had a little more testing than the guy who wrote the code making sure it compiles, and the guy who built the package making sure something pops up when he runs the program. Getting three different people on each platform to at least walk from the beginning of the game to Balmora will shed all kinds of light on the stability of the code, I'm sure.

User avatar
raevol
Posts: 3076
Joined: 07 Aug 2011, 01:12
Location: Caldera

Re: OpenMW 0.25.0

Post by raevol » 25 May 2013, 00:50

What would be kind of cool is if, as our "testing", we all hopped on IRC and had a weekend of non-stop playthrough. :D Beer encouraged!

User avatar
TorbenC
Posts: 146
Joined: 26 Aug 2012, 23:13

Re: OpenMW 0.25.0

Post by TorbenC » 25 May 2013, 02:30

BrotherBrick wrote:Really guys... are we that anal retentive? I have never.. not once, seen an "1.0" release not contain any bugs... hence the joke "inclusive bugs" plus a smiley face. There will come a time when Zini has to pull that trigger and get us over that mental barrier.
I do want to point out that I have no clue where you go the idea that people are saying "1.0 needs to be bug-free" No one said that, you assumed that. All I see are people disagreeing with not doing a beta release before 1.0 to clean out as many bugs as possible.

Post Reply