Right. I deeply question that logic though. The fact that a corrupted save bug was fixed is sort of a game changer from a usability perspective. I mean, if it wasn't well known, well documented, or fixed, I might say that it makes sense but as it stands, releasing code that has a known catastrophic or critical or severe bug that was later fixed seems like it will just cause far more problems in the future, especially on systems that don't take updates.
Again, I wouldn't find this a problem except in this fairly rare case particularly when the first thing to do is make sure that the software used is up to date when it comes to fixing problems. I suppose, that said, I don't mind testing lyx on various systems but the 2.0.8 branch is old and is in release for what, at least a year? What additional testing, apart from that, is required? Is there a spec sheet for various usability tests that should be performed or is it just ad-hoc testing and report bugs to the channel? ~Ben On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 6:28 PM, Richard Heck <rgh...@lyx.org> wrote: > On 07/02/2015 03:24 PM, Benedict Holland wrote: > >> Just curious, why are we testing old versions of an application with >> known catastrophic bugs? Wasn't the uncorrupted save feature implemented in >> the 2.1 branch? Also, I have been using the 2.1.3 exclusively for a long >> time and I admit that I am a power user. It is stable as anything I use and >> when combined with LuaTex, it produces beamer presentations and pdf >> documents that are absolutely stunning. This includes images. XeLatex had >> problems for me when importing PDF images but LuaTex does it far better. >> None of this has to do with Lyx though. Lyx is performing beautifully and I >> am using it to the fullest extent possible. >> >> The ONLY thing I have a gripe about is the lack of biblatex and biber >> support. I get it, but I wish that it was there. >> > > The testing here, I take it, is just to make sure that 2.0.8.1 works as > expected on Ubuntu 14.04, which is still live (and widely used) and whose > policies prohibit an upgrade to 2.1.x. Despite all the bugfixes. > > Richard > >
