[Opensim-dev] Beta? (UNCLASSIFIED)

Thu Jun 12 17:30:33 UTC 2014

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

Is there a feature list somewhere that has been ratified by the Open
Simulator code acceptance authority?  That would be a good place to start
for determining how far from "feature complete" the code is.

v/r -douglas

Douglas Maxwell, MSME
Science and Technology Manager
Virtual World Strategic Applications
U.S. Army Research Lab
Simulation & Training Technology Center (STTC)
(c) (407) 242-0209
NEW DoD Email:  Douglas.Maxwell3.civ at mail.mil

-----Original Message-----
From: opensim-dev-bounces at opensimulator.org
[mailto:opensim-dev-bounces at opensimulator.org] On Behalf Of Tom
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 6:50 AM
To: opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
Subject: Re: [Opensim-dev] Beta?

I know this is an old subject. Feature complete is feature complete for a
particular release not for evermore. The point of a new releases is that
they will contain new new features, changes etc. or else why bother with a
new release.   

Alpha and beta are normally related to levels of testing e.g. internal
inhouse testing (alpha), released to the wider world ( beta) for a period of
time before  release. It gives an indication of the reliability and
stability. Testing, especially beta testing can in some systems may be a
judgement that a high level of stability has been achieved. This is as
applicable to iterative development cycles as any others. The mere fact that
people have been using this successfully in a production environment for so
long suggests to me that the core of OpenSim is already stable and
sufficiently bug free enough to be used in these environments. 

By saying it is alpha you are doing yourselves and all the core developers a
great disservice. You are all better than should be proud of your
achievements.

Alpha software is saying "use with great care" it may be very buggy.
OpenSim is far better than that.   By being permanently at alpha (after 7
years it seems so) it is also obscuring from users what can and cannot be
used safely. Are you really saying to users it is not fit to use after 7
years of development? Even beta is excessively cautious.

I suggest that your use of alpha and beta is out of sync with the industry
norm and is hence misleading users. If you apply the OpenSim standards would
you still consider all the viewer code alpha, second life alpha?

I am talking as someone with 15 years IT experience in software development
and configuration management. 

Tom Willans BSc(Hons) MBCS CITP
Chartered IT Professional

On 12 Jun 2014, at 01:31, Frank Nichols <j.frank.nichols at gmail.com> wrote:

	The problem I see is that there are a lot of grids forming - people
and universities using OS and general "production" uses being made, all the
while we are calling it Alpha. Alpha gives great deniability and the ability
to say - don't use this in a production system. The reality is that people
are. So...

	I suggest it is time (what about 7 years now?) that we/someone
writes a specification that basically documents what OS is today, and call
that the "spec" which then becomes maintained. Then move the code to Beta -
meaning that it implements the specification but has bugs. Then we can focus
on fixing the bugs so the spec "works" and adding new features to the spec
that the dev's want to add. That way users will be able to do a little more
planning than they can today.

	I expect it will take a while to write a spec, so maybe 0.9 would be
a good goal to shoot for going beta?

	On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 7:34 PM, Shaun T. Erickson <ste at smxy.org>
wrote:

		From opensim-dev IRC chat, last September 25th (edited to
leave out non-pertinent chatter):

		[17:24] <diva> justincc, ... are you ok with tagging this
release as beta?
		[17:26] <justincc> diva: no - with these kinds of issues I'm
unhappy with even not saying it's alpha. ...
		[17:26] <nebadon> we should probably mark a beta as 0.8
		[17:26] <nebadon> and not 0.7.6
		[17:27] <justincc> nebadon: beta is meaningless here -
opensim is never going to be feature complete
		[17:28] <nebadon> I am not saying that is what we should
definitively do, but say we were going to do that I think it should be 0.8
for the beta, and I agree I dont think beta should happen right now
		[17:28] <smxy> It could be feature complete if there were
more devs working on it.
		[17:29] <nebadon> while things have improved considerably
		[17:29] <nebadon> there is still a ton of broken stuff
		[17:29] <frnic> smxy, you need to have a specification to be
feature complete.
		[17:29] <frnic> It is an evolving project, so doesn't have a
specification.
		[17:30] <diva> and who ever said that the tag "beta" is
associated with "feature complete"?
		[17:30] <frnic> industry general definition is beta is
feature complete, bay be buggy.
		[17:30] <nebadon> well ya thats true, i dont think that
either, i know i didnt say that :)
		[17:30] <lkalif> feature complete is nonsense some middle
managers invented in the late 20th century
		[17:30] <frnic> I was a project manager for 30 years, I
think I know that muchg - lol
		[17:30] <nebadon> haha
		[17:31] <AllenKerensky> ... just stick with revision #s and
call some of the milestones heh
		[17:31] <lkalif> it has long been obsoleted and put to rest
where it belongs
		[17:31] <nebadon> well one thing I would like to see happen
before we go beta is have BulletSim be the default physics engine
		[17:31] <nebadon> and also work a bit better than it does
now
		[17:31] <diva> that's not how it's used out there. It's used
to denote "this is pretty good, but it still has issues".

		To my knowledge, and according to my logs (which are not
100% complete), there's been no talk of this since, and 0.8.0 is on Release
Candidate 3 and about to be released.

		So, when might OpenSim move to a beta status, and would it
be a meaningless tag, as Justin claimed, or actually signify something and
be a real milestone for the project?

		-ste

		(AKA Smxy (IRC) & Shaun Emerald (in-world))
		_______________________________________________
		Opensim-dev mailing list
		Opensim-dev at opensimulator.org

http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
<blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev> 

	_______________________________________________
	Opensim-dev mailing list
	Opensim-dev at opensimulator.org
	http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
<blockedhttp://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev> 

Classification: UNCLASSIFIED
Caveats: NONE

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 7249 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://opensimulator.org/pipermail/opensim-dev/attachments/20140612/da12840f/attachment-0001.bin>