Yeah, every beta tester would have had a licence at some stage, they just get free continual upgrades I think.. All I was meaning with this is that if they're holding back on letting more beta testers in because of the potential "cost", then remove that part of it- as I can't see that deterring anyoneMatt said:Well honestly, any BETA tester should already own a copy of LSP's latest incarnation. Perhaps instead of giving free licenses to BETA testers, discounts for updated / up version software should be on offer instead. Sure this wont suit all people to a tea, but it will help stop those people who are just in it for the freebies, plus also ensure that the right people are there for future testing.
There is already a system used for tracking bugs (the "projects" section on the website), but I think there needs to be a major overhaul to clean it all up and ensure everyone is on the same page.. And also to ensure everything is together - many bugs were reported to David directly via email, or submitted through LSP itself (which I think just sent David an email).. Having a way of marking a job as a duplicate of another is a standard part of most bug tracking software -Matt said:Also agree, that no matter what the oputcome of numbers within a BETA there are, a bug tracker is definately required.
Having a new QCC, and having Dean take control should improve things a lot - previously, with David being the owner/project manager/developer (all on the side from his day job?), it really came down to what he wanted to do.. And to be honest, like most programmers, he probably found it more interesting to add new features than to reproduce and fix bugs.