CS 2.1 - When, Where, What?

http://communityserver.org/blogs/announcements/archive/2006/04/25/527062.aspx

How do you like the new Paperclip theme in CS 2.1?

Very cool Skin

But July?   *joke*

Thanks for the info.

There's alot of bugs that telligent are working true

July??? !!! Can you at least release a service pack with the current fixes? Please? Pretty please?

mmorozov:

July??? !!! Can you at least release a service pack with the current fixes? Please? Pretty please?

No, unfortunately, we cannot. There is still a lot of testing that needs to go into even the first ~80 issues that have been resolved and lots of other things required before we release a new version. 

You missed out HOW

How will the service pack be released? ie All the changed assemblies and ascx, aspx files only?

DavidRhodes2:

You missed out HOW

How will the service pack be released? ie All the changed assemblies and ascx, aspx files only?

All of the source, same as usual.

I think we all realize by now that all real testing is done by the end users. With all due respect, if 2.0 was tested extensively, there wouldn't have been a need for version 2.1. Some of those 80 bugs are quite lame and could have been caught with minimal effort (like losing the attachment after editing the post).

I was using Community Server since version 1.0 and my forum at socionics.org has over 1,100,000 posts. The database is 18 GB in size. I had to optimize some SPs just to get it working. It was timing out all the time. I bought the license when 2.0 was released.

I'd be happy to assist in testing if you like. My installation of CommunityServer is a very good test ground with a lot of active users reporting issues and problems daily. I also have CS integrated into other sites and planning to do more installations. I am a Principal Consultant at Neudesic, MCSD and I am becoming quite familiar with CS internals. I don't mind running a beta, or even an alpha version. Version 2.0 feels like a beta anyway with all the problems that I am having. If I can help you make CS better and have a better version running on my server, everybody wins.

 

 

mmorozov:

I think we all realize by now that all real testing is done by the end users. With all due respect, if 2.0 was tested extensively, there wouldn't have been a need for version 2.1. Some of those 80 bugs are quite lame and could have been caught with minimal effort (like losing the attachment after editing the post).

With respect, I disagree with your statements. I won't speak for everyone but what I know is that all software has bugs (yep, even simple ones that could have been caught before the software shipped). I know that every piece of software I've ever used has shipped a subsequent version with bug fixes for issues in the previous version. There will always be a need for a "CS 2.1". It wouldn't matter if we had 100 testers there would still be bugs.

Am I saying that we have exhausted all possible ways of testing in our process or that we couldn't catch more bugs? No, absolutely not. We continously try to improve our process so the number of bugs we ship with gets smaller with each release.

mmorozov:

I was using Community Server since version 1.0 and my forum at socionics.org has over 1,100,000 posts. The database is 18 GB in size. I had to optimize some SPs just to get it working. It was timing out all the time. I bought the license when 2.0 was released.

That is a large forum site and it does not surprise me that a CS 1.0 site timed out with that volume. We tried to make it clear that CS 1.1 was a performance focused release and we resolved a great deal of issues with regards to performance in that release. http://forums.asp.net also has over 1million posts and it does not time out all the time (it started on CS 1.1).

I am sorry, when I said 1.0 I actually meant 1.1. I did try to install version 1.0 but it was not something I could release to the public.

So I waited for 1.1 and then I was making changes to 1.1. I have made changes to a few stored procedures and the following files:

c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Controls\Views\PostFlatView.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Controls\Utility\Pager.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Components\ForumPost.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Controls\User\CreateUser.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Controls\Utility\AlphaPicker.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Components\Provider\CommonDataProvider.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Components\Components\Post.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Controls\Views\SearchResultsView.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Components\Components\Transforms.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Components\ForumFormatter.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Components\Components\SiteUrls.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Components\Components\SiteUrlsData.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Controls\Admin\MemberAdmin.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Controls\User\EditProfile.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Controls\User\PostIcons.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Components\Components\Profile.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Controls\Utility\DatePicker.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Data Providers\SqlDataProvider\ForumsSqlDataProvider.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Posts.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Providers\ForumDataProvider.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Moderate.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Controls\Utility\ForumLinkBar.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Components\Threads.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Controls\User\ForgottenPassword.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Controls\Views\ThreadView.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Controls\User\UserProfile.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Controls\Navigation\BreadCrumb.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Components\Enumerations\SortThreadsBy.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Controls\PostDisplay\TextPost.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Controls\User\UserAvatar.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Controls\User\UserAttribute.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Components\Enumerations\UserAttributes.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Components\Modules\PlainTextModule.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Controls\CreateEditPost.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Forums\Controls\Utility\ThreadPager.cs
c:\Development\CS\CS11\Galleries\Controls\SearchResults.cs

It was probably a dumb thing to do in the long run. I knew I was getting the code branched and upgrading to 2.0 would not be easy. It wasn't too difficult after all but I lost all improvements that I implemented and I don't want to make these modifications again and be screwed when version 2.1 or 3.0 comes out. So my only hope right now is you guys!

alowe:

DavidRhodes2:

You missed out HOW

How will the service pack be released? ie All the changed assemblies and ascx, aspx files only?

All of the source, same as usual.

It says it's a service pack release which makes it sound more of just changed files. Are you going to release a list of the changed files? Some people have spent alot of time re-skinning their sites, you can't expect them to go through that again each time you release a minor version.

alowe:

With respect, I disagree with your statements. I won't speak for everyone but what I know is that all software has bugs (yep, even simple ones that could have been caught before the software shipped). I know that every piece of software I've ever used has shipped a subsequent version with bug fixes for issues in the previous version.

And I don't disagree with that. Any software has bugs, period. I am a programmer too. However there is testing and there is testing. The bug I mentioned shows the lack of regression testing. The old working functionality was broken by some new feature. This usually indicates that testing was performed by the developers themselves. It never works out. Developers rarely do regression testing and  I am no exception myself. Programmers are too happy cranking out new features and they would rather add a new feature then test something they wrote a year ago. If you don't have a formal regression testing procedure and a dedicated Q/A team, the only other way to test is field testing. But field testing is something that takes time. If 100 sites successfully installed CS 2.0 and didn't report any problems within a month, does it mean it was field tested? Not really.

alowe:

We continously try to improve our process so the number of bugs we ship with gets smaller with each release.

The number of known bugs, you mean? Of course it gets smaller, you are fixing them after all. But when I look at the sheer volume of new features that was added to CS 2.0, I foresee a lot more bugs coming your way, probably around version 3.0 timeframe, when all these new features are really put to the test in the field. It is a neverending war in which we (programmers) cannot win. We create more bugs than we can find and fix. It's a fact of life.

alowe:

That is a large forum site and it does not surprise me that a CS 1.0 site timed out with that volume. We tried to make it clear that CS 1.1 was a performance focused release and we resolved a great deal of issues with regards to performance in that release.

As a mentioned above, CS 1.1 didn't solve my performance problems so I had to get my hands dirty. Some of the fixes I made to 1.1. I applied to 2.0 as well.

http://forums.asp.net also has over 1million posts and it does not time out all the time (it started on CS 1.1).

My point exactly! How can you find and fix bugs if your site doesn't exhibit them? My site doesn't even show the correct number of messages. It went over 1.1 million, but the site stats show 950 thousands and the number doesn't change anymore. I can't say for everyone, but in my company (Neudesic) "it works on my machine" is not a valid excuse

I sincerely want to help making CS a better product. I am already married to it, I payed for it, I integrated it in many of my projects and I have recommended it to many people. I can give you access to my production server so you can debug the problems in the environment where they really occur. My event log and the exceptions table is overfilling with exceptions that make my heart skip. At first I thought it was a problem with my installation or my server, but I can see that other people are also having similar problems.

So, here it is - I officially offer my help as a beta-tester and a screwed up instance of CS 2.0 to dig around.

Thank you.

mmorozov:

alowe:

With respect, I disagree with your statements. I won't speak for everyone but what I know is that all software has bugs (yep, even simple ones that could have been caught before the software shipped). I know that every piece of software I've ever used has shipped a subsequent version with bug fixes for issues in the previous version.

And I don't disagree with that. Any software has bugs, period. I am a programmer too. However there is testing and there is testing. The bug I mentioned shows the lack of regression testing. The old working functionality was broken by some new feature. This usually indicates that testing was performed by the developers themselves. It never works out. Developers rarely do regression testing and  I am no exception myself. Programmers are too happy cranking out new features and they would rather add a new feature then test something they wrote a year ago. If you don't have a formal regression testing procedure and a dedicated Q/A team, the only other way to test is field testing. But field testing is something that takes time. If 100 sites successfully installed CS 2.0 and didn't report any problems within a month, does it mean it was field tested? Not really.

As I said, we're constantly refining our testing procedures including building a dedicated Q/A team. We have room to improve and we know that.

alowe:

We continously try to improve our process so the number of bugs we ship with gets smaller with each release.

mmorozov:

The number of known bugs, you mean? Of course it gets smaller, you are fixing them after all. But when I look at the sheer volume of new features that was added to CS 2.0, I foresee a lot more bugs coming your way, probably around version 3.0 timeframe, when all these new features are really put to the test in the field. It is a neverending war in which we (programmers) cannot win. We create more bugs than we can find and fix. It's a fact of life.

Hopefully both known and unknown. Known is obviously getting smaller but hopefully unknown is getting smaller as we add unit tests and a more formal QA process.

alowe:

That is a large forum site and it does not surprise me that a CS 1.0 site timed out with that volume. We tried to make it clear that CS 1.1 was a performance focused release and we resolved a great deal of issues with regards to performance in that release.

mmorozov:

As a mentioned above, CS 1.1 didn't solve my performance problems so I had to get my hands dirty. Some of the fixes I made to 1.1. I applied to 2.0 as well.

We'd be happy to see the performance tweaks you made. Please post them to the forums so we can review and/or send them to me at alowe at telligent dot com.

http://forums.asp.net also has over 1million posts and it does not time out all the time (it started on CS 1.1).

mmorozov:

My point exactly! How can you find and fix bugs if your site doesn't exhibit them? My site doesn't even show the correct number of messages. It went over 1.1 million, but the site stats show 950 thousands and the number doesn't change anymore. I can't say for everyone, but in my company (Neudesic) "it works on my machine" is not a valid excuse

My point wasn't to say that it works on my machine.

mmorozov:

I sincerely want to help making CS a better product. I am already married to it, I payed for it, I integrated it in many of my projects and I have recommended it to many people. I can give you access to my production server so you can debug the problems in the environment where they really occur. My event log and the exceptions table is overfilling with exceptions that make my heart skip. At first I thought it was a problem with my installation or my server, but I can see that other people are also having similar problems.

So, here it is - I officially offer my help as a beta-tester and a screwed up instance of CS 2.0 to dig around.

Thank you.

That's great to hear. All of our betas are open to anyone so it shouldn't be hard to get on the list.

Are you saying there will be a beta of version 2.1 earlier than July? That would be awesome.

mmorozov:

Are you saying there will be a beta of version 2.1 earlier than July? That would be awesome.

Yes.