What are you doing (ingame) now?

[Dudley]

Ah... I have a hammer and a plasterers trowel (don't know where the trowel came from though ) - will these items fix the issue..?

[Falcon_D]

Hello,
I'm really at a loss as to how FD does QA. The Amazon could server design might also be contributing to this on going lack of QA. On the surface everything seems pretty and fine. But dig a little deeper or if you are lucky/unlucky, bugs start crawling out.
I know a lot of people keep saying that ED is still a product in development cause of FD's 10 year plan. But I'm just not buying it. Keep thinking of this: Samsung probably has a 10yr development plan for their washing machines. But if I programmed my Samsung washing machine to warm wash my clothes and every once in awhile it decides to cold wash them, then I'm sure as hell going to get the maintenance guy to fix it, else Samsung to replace it. If warranty over, then buy another washing machine.
Software development is usually not upheld to the same standards. We've all come to accept a certain level of bugs in any software that we use. But there is a limit.
Acceptance Test servers, Acceptance Test Procedures, Regression testing, server rotation, bug tracking, Customer reported bug tracking, all these would help mitigate bugs. But it seems that FD does not really use much of these.

Oh well. I'm currently still having fun. And hopefully FD get their bugs sorted out before too much unrecoverable damage.

Have fun, fly safe. o7

[Falcon_D]

Ah... I have a hammer

^Yes^

Have fun, fly safe. o7

[thebs]

I don't know about in-game, but I've seemingly found myself engaged in (caused?) some PvP around here. Yes, I can poke fun at myself too. Life is too short to get upset or hold any grudges.

[Schmobius]

All I know is at my job, changes don't go to production with zero testing, even if most of the other changes were tested. We don't even get the luxury of a beta testing period, just internal regression testing, and we are expected to catch everything there.

[thebs]

Hello,
I'm really at a loss as to how FD does QA. The Amazon could server design might also be contributing to this on going lack of QA. On the surface everything seems pretty and fine. But dig a little deeper or if you are lucky/unlucky, bugs start crawling out.
I know a lot of people keep saying that ED is still a product in development cause of FD's 10 year plan. But I'm just not buying it. Keep thinking of this: Samsung probably has a 10yr development plan for their washing machines. But if I programmed my Samsung washing machine to warm wash my clothes and every once in awhile it decides to cold wash them, then I'm sure as hell going to get the maintenance guy to fix it, else Samsung to replace it. If warranty over, then buy another washing machine.
Software development is usually not upheld to the same standards. We've all come to accept a certain level of bugs in any software that we use. But there is a limit.
Acceptance Test servers, Acceptance Test Procedures, Regression testing, server rotation, bug tracking, Customer reported bug tracking, all these would help mitigate bugs. But it seems that FD does not really use much of these.

Oh well. I'm currently still having fun. And hopefully FD get their bugs sorted out before too much unrecoverable damage.

Have fun, fly safe. o7

Most control systems are much easier to deal with than generic PCs, because there is far, far less logic and coding involved to do basic items. Unfortunately, in the age of the Internet, an IP stack is an IP stack, and an unmaintained one is a dangerous, especially the more common and generic one gets.

► Show Spoiler

Off Topic

Hence the main reason you'll never see me add control systems that are Internet accessible in my home, and I don't like them in my car either. Heck, people who plugged those insurance monitors into their CANbus found out just how easy it is to hack them. Chrysler also got exposed.

That said, some OSes, like QNX, have a far, far better track record than Windows Mobile and even a number of the BSD or Linux-based embedded releases have their issues. Although most of the latter is explained by a few car manufacturers either outsourcing or not sticking to the original BOM by their engineers.

E.g., Toyota's engineering and BOM was actually really good, fully certified from dev stack to hardware, as well as the code atop of the platform, as even NASA validated. But it was Toyota management changing out boards, like ones with half the memory (stack overflows) and lack of hardware watchdog timers (and just flat out not certified), as well as using non-certified dev stacks/distro targets for the software plaform in the '00s, away from the engineering design and BOM, even when US regulatory requirements mandated they not source differently.

NOTE: Nearly all of this has been hidden from public record, sans one, private lawsuit that had its info plastered all over virtually every EE trade mag a few years back (yeah, it was that bad). There's a private litigator, himself an EE with experience in the industry no less, that is one of the few guys that explains exactly what happened to Toyota's vehicles. It's all related to management, not engineering. But since Toyota management that made the decision is not here in the US, they cannot prosecute. Part of the reason Toyota got the bigger fine than GM, because that's all they could do. GM at least stopped shipping things in new cars when they knew they were defective, and stalled on the recalls. Toyota not only kept shipping, but the one, disclosed, private lawsuit proved they made the original decision at the BOM-level, against engineering design.

[thebs]

All I know is at my job, changes don't go to production with zero testing, even if most of the other changes were tested. We don't even get the luxury of a beta testing period, just internal regression testing, and we are expected to catch everything there.

The best unit testing, with the ultimate test suite and regression testing, is nothing, without integration testing.

When I read FD still has to change things from the Beta servers, on the production servers, and then were down as a result ... that immediately made me realize they are utterly lacking a model that provides actual acceptance testing of the fully integrated set of changes. They are literally making modifications to production that are not in beta, so wholly untested.

[tinnitus]

Was happy to see the Upgrade this morning but now I cannot play after the update was applied I get this message

Unhandled exeption during project update:
Data erro (cyclic redundancy check).

Oh well there goes my Elite Dangerous Friday morning...

[thebs]

Was happy to see the Upgrade this morning but now I cannot play after the update was applied I get this message
Unhandled exeption during project update:
Data erro (cyclic redundancy check).
Oh well there goes my Elite Dangerous Friday morning...

All the more reason I haven't bothered logging in. I'm waiting for the "all clear" from most people. There continue to be integration issues, and this isn't the only one I'm hearing of.

Although I plan to logon and get prepared for the Nebula tour, assuming it's still on, next week.

[Falcon_D]

Hello,
Update worked fine for me. Played for about 3hrs. No problems so far.
Done for the day though. Parked on a planet and now heading for the bar deck on my Conda.

Have fun, fly safe. o7