Would it make sense to make 2.6 a pure, extensive, QA bug-fix-only release?

[Viktor CR]

This question is directed towards Affinity management, as a hint at quite a few, long unresolved bugs, that also repeatedly resurface in the Bugs section of the forum.

Dependability is important for professional use, and quirks, that pop up by surprise

• upon closer inspection and preflighting – sometimes just before going to production at export
  requiring one to scramble, troubleshoot and re-work the entire document after the fact
• as well as when trying to figure out that e.g.
  • color handling (blend modes)
  • or application of existing features
    doesn't seem to do what's expected

are big disappointers. Even more so, when we discover it's been a known issue for quite some time.

I'd be happy to have – anyway yet unknown – promises of new features delayed by a month or two, to get already known bugs squashed, so we can have fewer surprises during professional work, without having to read up on the Bug section.

If a new feature is going to take care of past bugs automatically — then, of course that refactoring or new approach to the involved facility is welcome in the form of a new feature, too.

[Affinityconfusesme]

+3000000 

[bures]

A better designation would be 2.59. I don't think we'll get a version that fixes all the existing bugs, though.

[Alfred]

1 minute ago, bures said:

A better designation would be 2.59.

The current beta version is 2.5.0. Subsequent versions will be 2.5.1, 2.5.2, etc, so 2.6 is the next major point release. Although there might be a 2.5.9 before 2.6.0, version 2.59 is highly unlikely ever to see the light of day.

2 minutes ago, bures said:

I don't think we'll get a version that fixes all the existing bugs, though.

It would be hugely overoptimistic to expect such a version.

[Seneca]

My take on this is slightly different. I would like new features and bug fixes to go hand in hand.

[Meliora spero]

On 5/12/2024 at 1:47 AM, Viktor CR said:

This question is directed towards Affinity management, as a hint at quite a few, long unresolved bugs, that also repeatedly resurface in the Bugs section of the forum.

Dependability is important for professional use, and quirks, that pop up by surprise

• upon closer inspection and preflighting – sometimes just before going to production at export
• as well as when trying to figure out that e.g.
  • color handling (blend modes)
  • or application of existing features
    doesn't seem to do what's expected

are big disappointers. Even more so, when we discover it's been a known issue for quite some time.

I'd be happy to have – anyway yet unknown – promises of new features delayed by a month or two, to get already known bugs squashed, so we can have fewer surprises during professional work, without having to read up on the Bug section.

If a new feature is going to take care of past bugs automatically — then, of course that refactoring or new approach to the involved facility is welcome in the form of a new feature, too.

Yes, very much so. It seems that errors and omissions have their biggest (or only) chance during the beta phase when it comes to new features, and that they are not prioritized even though they are logged, except on rare occasions. It goes without saying that if new features are always required, then the allocation of resources for bugs will be accordingly. It seems that this applies to algorithms and features as well, that refactoring and improvements of existing functionality just don't happen. For example, the algorithms behind JPG, which seem to be older than Affinity itself, could probably be replaced.

And then I can tell those impatient souls that their constant demand for new features also contributes to blocking improvements or architectural overhauls of Affinity. It is not a mature choice, since these improvements may be necessary for some new features to be implemented at all - or to be implemented without massive effort.

In other words - those of us in the serious group of Affinity's customers who produce with Affinity, would often, as a matter of course, allocate a release to bugs, quality improvements, architectural enhancements, and updates of various libraries. Maintenance is a natural and essential part of everything else in society; it is critical for operational stability, performance, security, everything. Thereby also for the company's reputation.

For those of you who would consider it the greatest disaster in the world to miss out on new features in a release - I would use that time to learn new techniques or otherwise become a better creator, including as a designer and graphic artist. 

[fde101]

6 hours ago, Aldus said:

would often, as a matter of course, allocate a release to bugs, quality improvements

Seems to me that most of the point releases between minor versions fit at least those first two items?

[bbrother]

@Viktor CR you're right. This has gone to far😠. Dealing with the accumulation of unresolved bugs in your daily work becomes increasingly frustrating.
I would be very happy to see a 5th pledge that reads specifically like this:

Quote

We will double our efforts in bug fixing.

 

[bures]

On 5/13/2024 at 11:47 AM, Alfred said:

The current beta version is 2.5.0. Subsequent versions will be 2.5.1, 2.5.2, etc, so 2.6 is the next major point release. Although there might be a 2.5.9 before 2.6.0, version 2.59 is highly unlikely ever to see the light of day.

It would be hugely overoptimistic to expect such a version.

Of course I meant 2.5.9, the version before 2.6. Version with no new features, just fixes.

[Alfred]

8 minutes ago, bures said:

2.5.9, the version before 2.6

For all we know, the version before 2.6 might be 2.5.4 or 2.5.13.

[Pšenda]

42 minutes ago, Alfred said:

2.5.13

This version number must be skipped for obvious reasons, as launching this version on Friday would wipe out all data and destroy your computer, and possibly worse - such as introducing a subscription to Affinity apps.

[ronnyb]

Well said @Aldus the accumulation of bugs quickly becomes a spiders’s web and rat’s nest of entangled workarounds and hacks, quickly destroying the otherwise excellent user experience Affinity provides. I recently started a similar thread in the beta forums. Workarounds are ok for non-professional use cases, but not for serious users who depend on efficient workflows to meet daily deadlines.

IMHO, at this point Affinity need a MAJOR bug fixing release before the stability and usefulness of the software further deteriorates for professional, regular, daily use. This obviously needs to happen regularly and seriously, not just fixing the low hanging bugs…..

[bures]

Not every user uses all the features of the apps. Nor does the professional user use all the features. There are a lot of bugs in apps, but even a professional may not encounter them in their work. Therefore, I would rather not argue that professionals cannot work with apps.
Still, it is very important that Serif focuses more on fixing bugs not only for new features, but also fixing old bugs. I think the pace of new feature introductions should be slowed down in favor of bug fixes.

[bbrother]

3 hours ago, bures said:

Still, it is very important that Seriv focuses more on fixing bugs not only for new features, but also fixing old bugs.
I think the pace of new feature introductions should be slowed down in favor of bug fixes.

Serif should pay equal attention to both, fixing bugs and improvements, and developing and implementing new features, and not favor one at the expense of slowing down the other. This is what development is all about and this is how progress is built. We'll see what the response will be after the takeover.

Either way, fundamental changes to the process will be necessary, otherwise I don't see how it can continue with the same patterns.

[Viktor CR]

6 hours ago, bbrother said:

equal attention to both

Sure, let's let Serif decide on how they do these things.
It doesn't need to be at the same time — there can also be periods of pure refactoring and reflection. They will know best, how they want to develop their business culture.

[PaoloT]

Contrary to most companies, Affinity carries on an extensive beta program. What's bad with just participating to this vast bug-catching collective work at each beta? And then, if there were no new features introduced, what where we looking for?

Paolo

 

[bbrother]

5 hours ago, Viktor CR said:

Sure, let's let Serif decide on how they do these things.

No one is going to dictate to them how they should run their business. But their system clearly doesn't work because we are where we are with a lot of unresolved bugs. I don't think they would be able to change and improve it themselves. You need someone with a fresh perspective, and that's where I see a role for Canva.

[bures]

16 hours ago, bbrother said:

Serif should pay equal attention to both, fixing bugs and improvements, and developing and implementing new features, and not favor one at the expense of slowing down the other. This is what development is all about and this is how progress is built. We'll see what the response will be after the takeover.

From time to time it is necessary to change priorities and focus more on a certain type of development activity.

On the other hand, it is possible that the problem of persistent bugs is being exaggerated by some users.

[PaoloT]

5 hours ago, bbrother said:

You need someone with a fresh perspective, and that's where I see a role for Canva.

Let's hope the mystic of the savior will work, this time!

 

[bbrother]

3 hours ago, bures said:

From time to time it is necessary to change priorities and focus more on a certain type of development activity.

If the entire process is well prepared, resources are adequate, activities are well coordinated and divided, there is no need to change priorities.
On the contrary, constantly or sporadically changing priorities to focus on a specific task results in unsustainable development.

I know this from my own experience and daily work as a full-stack web developer for over 14 years.

 

3 hours ago, bures said:

On the other hand, it is possible that the problem of persistent bugs is being exaggerated by some users.

I don't think so.

[Capitaine Pongo]

On 5/13/2024 at 8:34 PM, Aldus said:

For those of you who would consider it the greatest disaster in the world to miss out on new features in a release - I would use that time to learn new techniques or otherwise become a better creator, including as a designer and graphic artist. 

Except that, like many, we are already professionals. And one of our biggest desires is to get rid of Adobe. There are still a few functions missing to leave it permanently. For example titles in several columns and multi-pages for leaflets or hard covers.

[Optische Ausrichtung]

On 5/16/2024 at 1:48 AM, PaoloT said:

What's bad with just participating to this vast bug-catching collective work at each beta?

For how many years (or how many releases) should we do this? Some bugs are older than we are. 

 

[PaoloT]

13 minutes ago, Optische Ausrichtung said:

For how many years (or how many releases) should we do this?

I guess, as long as there are new releases. If you don't like bugs, you'd better go with Adobe. There aren't bugs, there!

 

[Bryan Rieger]

42 minutes ago, Capitaine Pongo said:

Except that, like many, we are already professionals. And one of our biggest desires is to get rid of Adobe…

I wonder how many Adobe users have begun trialing/using Affinity in the past week and run into not only UX/UI issues, but also significant bugs? It's wonderful that so many people are now discovering the Affinity apps, but if their first impressions are one of bug-ridden confusion and stability issues, I can't imagine they'll stick around for long—if not write them off entirely.

Acquiring new customers is hard. Getting them to take a second look is even harder.

If Canva really bought Affinity with the intent to appeal to professional users, these long-standing issues aren't going to do much to help the cause.

It would be a shame to lose them (potentially forever) due to a less than stellar user experience.

[Optische Ausrichtung]

22 hours ago, PaoloT said:

There aren't bugs, there!

At least no ridiculous bugs. And if there are, then not for years.

Why I'm slowly but surely getting annoyed with Affinity: The Affinity suite could be so wonderful and cover almost 100% of my needs if Serif had a different culture of dealing with bugs. Programs that have serious colour management bugs for months on end are - I'm sorry to say - not fit for serious use. I don't need a spiral or QR code tool if the software can't set closing quotes correctly. And so on. 

In short, and in the spirit of the original question, it would be really nice if Serif, under new ownership, would finally work through the list of annoying bugs instead of inventing new features.