The title says it all. I seriously think that XnViewMP (I can't talk about Classic as I've never used it) needs a better approach to quality control. As it stands now I will refrain from any further update (I just updated to .80 but will go back to .79) until I am reasonable sure there are no significant problems with it. An application that potentially destroys my data is not something I fancy.
Sorry to have to say that but that's my take. Some may think I'm over-reacting, especially since XnViewMP is free for personal use. Nevertheless, I do have to trust the software I use (whether free or paid for) and currently I don't. Simple as that.
Better quality control?
Moderators: XnTriq, helmut, xnview, Dreamer
Re: Better quality control?
Why did you go back??
Do you have such problem?????jonha4711 wrote:An application that potentially destroys my data is not something I fancy.
Pierre.
Re: Better quality control?
As I wrote: because I do not trust XnViewMP.xnview wrote:Why did you go back??
I do. I've worked a lot with categories in the last weeks and it took me a long time to get used to the bug (that is apparently not a bug) that the Delete key, when pressed with the focus in the Categories tab, instead attempts to delete the selected images. No real harm done as I have multiple backups but I certainly can do without that distraction. (Admittedly, 0.79 has the same non-bug.)xnview wrote:jonha4711 wrote:An application that potentially destroys my data is not something I fancy.
Do you have such problem?????
There are also bug reports where, under certain circumstances, images are stripped of their EXIF data. That is definitely something that could be a real problem for me as I work regularly with new images which have not yet been backed up.
Anyway, I've run into so many quirks during the last weeks of extensive testing that I am now taking a back seat.
Re: Better quality control?
Sorry about that, but i do my best to fix all bugs...jonha4711 wrote: Anyway, I've run into so many quirks during the last weeks of extensive testing that I am now taking a back seat.
Pierre.
Re: Better quality control?
No hard feelings. I simply think that a little more effort in quality control BEFORE releasing a new version might help.xnview wrote:Sorry about that, but i do my best to fix all bugs...jonha4711 wrote: Anyway, I've run into so many quirks during the last weeks of extensive testing that I am now taking a back seat.
Re: Better quality control?
I can't test all posibilitiesjonha4711 wrote:No hard feelings. I simply think that a little more effort in quality control BEFORE releasing a new version might help.xnview wrote:Sorry about that, but i do my best to fix all bugs...jonha4711 wrote: Anyway, I've run into so many quirks during the last weeks of extensive testing that I am now taking a back seat.
Pierre.
Re: Better quality control?
Perhaps we should reintroduce beta testing phases?
Re: Better quality control?
Perhaps but i don't know how to make it simple (for me). The previous beta testing was difficult to follow...XnTriq wrote:Perhaps we should reintroduce beta testing phases?
Pierre.
Re: Better quality control?
As it stands right now, the early adopters of a new version (of whom I was one) are effectively the beta testers. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, it just means that people will have to decide at which point they actually install a new version.XnTriq wrote:Perhaps we should reintroduce beta testing phases?
I am not overly concerned with simple functional bugs but I'd be rather unhappy if a bug wiped out all or parts of my photo collection. (I do have multiple backups so it wouldn't be the end of the world, although occasionally, when I have a batch of new photos I work with them in XnViewMP w/o having them backed up beforehand.)
-
Erixx haxx
- Posts: 330
- Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 10:37 am
Re: Better quality control?
You could just go back to an earlier version and mark it as ( Known Stable Release). I would at least mark the versions coming out using new QT builds as beta, for a little while anyways. You have no idea what it might break or bugs introduced. New users might not be aware of this.
Lately, I've been staying at least 1 or 2 versions behind because i don't always have time for surprises. (certain things not working right).
This doesn't really bother me either. I'm not 1 that needs the (New Stamp) on my software, unless it brings a feature I have to have.
The db file is 1 thing, but files getting wiped or something else is another. So far everything has been alright for the most part. A while back I had to reformat my hard drive twice because of a drag drop bug.
My 2 cents anyway.
And Thank you for all that you do for Xnview and XnviewMP.
Both are great tools.
Lately, I've been staying at least 1 or 2 versions behind because i don't always have time for surprises. (certain things not working right).
This doesn't really bother me either. I'm not 1 that needs the (New Stamp) on my software, unless it brings a feature I have to have.
The db file is 1 thing, but files getting wiped or something else is another. So far everything has been alright for the most part. A while back I had to reformat my hard drive twice because of a drag drop bug.
My 2 cents anyway.
And Thank you for all that you do for Xnview and XnviewMP.
Both are great tools.
Re: Better quality control?
Perhaps we can create a group 'XnViewMP beta testing', i post a windows x64bits version (better to build quickly), and you check if there is no regression?
We can perhaps try for the 0.83?
We can perhaps try for the 0.83?
Pierre.
Re: Better quality control?
Yes, I think we should give it a try for the next release and also whenever Qt is updated.xnview wrote:Perhaps we can create a group 'XnViewMP beta testing', i post a windows x64bits version (better to build quickly), and you check if there is no regression?
We can perhaps try for the 0.83?
-
Erixx haxx
- Posts: 330
- Joined: Tue Jul 28, 2015 10:37 am
Re: Better quality control?
I get this message from that link: I Also tried from the front pagexnview wrote:please check this post
Is the board not finished yet and I Am too early ??You are not authorised to read this forum.
Re: Better quality control?
Could you please try again, Erixx haxx?Erixx haxx wrote:I get this message from that link: I Also tried from the front pageYou are not authorised to read this forum.