[cjakeman]

Hi Guys,

Firstly, may I thank everyone who reports problems with Open Rails. Open Rails could not be a quality product without you.

I just wanted to make a plea to everyone on here who is using the Testing Version of Open Rails, to consider switching to the Unstable Version.

James has some recent stats (which I'm hoping he will be sharing shortly) showing how many thousands of people around the world are using the Stable Version. But we don't get feedback from those guys; only from this community. If we had more people using the Unstable Version, then we would find problems sooner and fix them more easily.

Once a new piece of work or a bug-fix goes into the Unstable Version, it sits there for at least a week and much longer if it is complex. Then, by the time it is approved and incorporated into the Testing Version, the people who worked on it have moved on to something else. When a problem is reported in the Testing Version, we have to park our current work and go back to review previous work and try to solve the issue.

So the sooner we know about a problem the better and you can help by switching to the Unstable Version and finding these problems earlier in the process.

[scottb613]

Hi Chris,

Sorry - still have version confusion - I've been using Carlo's MG for years - where does the "unstable" fall in relation to that?

Thanks.

Regards,
Scott

[darwins]

The word "Unstable" and the description "...may contain serious defects. For developers only." puts most people off.
It certainly scared me away for some time. Could the description possibly be re-phrased to make it more attractive to ordinary people?

[cjakeman]

scottb613, on 31 March 2022 - 11:25 AM, said:

Sorry - still have version confusion - I've been using Carlo's MG for years - where does the "unstable" fall in relation to that?

Here's a diagram which tries to show how the 3 official versions are related - http://openrails.org...nload/versions/

I'll let Carlo explain where his OR_NewYear_MG version fits.

My appeal is to people here who are using the Testing Version, not Carlo's version.

[cjakeman]

darwins, on 31 March 2022 - 12:04 PM, said:

The word "Unstable" and the description "...may contain serious defects. For developers only." puts most people off.
It certainly scared me away for some time. Could the description possibly be re-phrased to make it more attractive to ordinary people?

I'm sorry it put you off when you have so much to offer.

We would rather "ordinary people" stayed with the Stable Version (which the Updater option marks as "recommended").

Members of the Open Rails community here on Elvas Tower are a lot more engaged than "ordinary people" and, from my experience, I would expect them to be more helpful in pursuing a problem to a resolution.

[scottb613]

Hi Chris,

Thanks. I just wasn't sure if I'd be losing anything by going to the "Unstable" - to help out.

We're special - awe shucks... We do try...
:cheers3:

Regards,
Scott

[engmod]

I have always used Carlo's ORMG and when Carlo finds bugs in the unstable, he feeds them back to the team.
I have a bug at the moment that Carlo is working on that I suspect will go back to the unstable.

[Csantucci]

As it was asked how the ORNYMG version fits into Chris' clear diagram, I'll try to answer.

An ORNYMG box would have as input arrows two of them for bug fixes and new features, one from the Testing release, and a dotted one from the Unstable release. Moreover it would have an output arrow towards the Unstable release.
Notes:
1) Some features from the Testing release might deliberatedly not be introduced into ORNYMG (e.g. removing some Menu options)
2) The dotted line from the Unstable release means that (especially for bugs) sometimes I anticipate importing changes in the official versions to before they are inserted in the Testing version
3) In general I pass all bug fixes from ORNYMG to the Unstable releases; there are some ones, whose effects I am not sure about, that aren't passed
4) In general I port new features from ORNYMG to the Unstable releases if and when they are accepted by the ORMT, if I consider them in an architecture and coding status that is compliant with the official OR standards, and if the author of the feature agrees to the porting.

[Weter]

My congrats with Your 2500-th, Chris!
Indeed, warning about "serious defects" is able to disattract many of ens-users.

I can think, how to re-phrase that in translated variant...