Too many updates

All suggestions about TPFC should be posted here. Discussions about changes to TPFC will also be carried out here.
Message
Author
User avatar
Andrew Lee
Posts: 3052
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 am
Contact:

Re: Too many updates

#16 Post by Andrew Lee »

lajjal wrote:I think there is a lot to learn from the way Distrowatch approaches the problem.
I am not intimately familiar with Distrowatch, so it will help if you could elaborate on what you feel they are doing right. Thanks!

***

I think lajjal is trying to highlight the potential problem of rogue developers exploiting the TPFC update system to gain some advantage in exposure. Indeed, this is a potential problem that was keenly on my mind when I developed TPFC V2.0.

Thankfully, so far, I haven't detected any such activities. Sure, some apps make more frequently releases, but I haven't detected any app persistently remaining on the front page due to such activities. The torrent of updates to the apps in the database make this quite difficult without resorting to drastic actions.

If I am mistaken, please let me know. If indeed such actions are identified, we can always ban the user involved.

Another things we can do is to limited the "push to top" behaviour to only one update per app per n days. This means the first time an app is updated, it is pushed to the top, but subsequent updates within the n day period will not have the same effect. If n = 1, I think it is still a pretty reasonable constraint.

***

For KidSafe's case, going through its update history, I don't think there's anything abnormal with its release cycle. If you are complaining about how frequently it updates, trust me, I have seen worse. :D

***

To summarize my view, I think the potential problem highlighted by lajjal is valid. However, I cannot find any evidence so far that the system has been exploited this way.

If indeed such exploitation are identified, we have two courses of action:

1) If such exploitations are rare, we can simply ban the rogue user.

2) If such exploitations become more common, we can impose a constraint on how often the app is pushed to the top when it is updated.

What do you think?

computerfreaker
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:46 pm

Re: Too many updates

#17 Post by computerfreaker »

Andrew Lee wrote:Another things we can do is to limited the "push to top" behaviour to only one update per app per n days. This means the first time an app is updated, it is pushed to the top, but subsequent updates within the n day period will not have the same effect. If n = 1, I think it is still a pretty reasonable constraint.
I'd be happy to take the lead here; I'm willing to let n be anything up to 30 for KidSafe. (For critical bug fixes, of course, I might have to request special permission to update sooner; the "options dialog shows up behind the main window, forcing a hard reboot" bug in 0.32.0.0 is a prime example of this)
Andrew Lee wrote:For KidSafe's case, going through its update history, I don't think there's anything abnormal with its release cycle. If you are complaining about how frequently it updates, trust me, I have seen worse. :D
Glad you don't think there's anything abnormal there; I was a bit worried, particularly when I saw you mention things like banning earlier in your post.
(Believe it or not, development has actually slowed down somewhat; in KidSafe's earliest days, when features were few & bugs were plenty, 2 updates a day wasn't uncommon. The official changelog says it all)
Andrew Lee wrote:What do you think?
Sounds good to me.
I'm happy to pledge my full cooperation, and (as I mentioned earlier) will be happy to lead off the "only one update every n days" initiative if it becomes necessary. If necessary, I'll even stop posting updates here; I definitely hope it doesn't come to that, though.

Cheers!

computerfreaker

User avatar
Firewrath
Posts: 321
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:36 pm

Re: Too many updates

#18 Post by Firewrath »

I have a ...minor solution. :P
this would save some space on the main page, and help with the 'it would be nice to have a New Entries only view' bit that id like, :P
(i could have swore Andy put that in or something but i cant remember and cant seem to find it, -_-)

take your (im guessing css code?) from the 'Whats New' section of an update, and apply it to the Whole item with a big + sign next to the 'Update' icon, (and - sign when its open,)
this would condense updates to just one line, allowing people to click on them to check them out, or ignore them if they dont want to,
it would also allow for more update items to be shown per page while keeping the 'New' items as full entries, (Which they should be, in order to catch peoples attention, imo,)



also, OT, but not worth a new thread, :P
Andy, can you make it so that when someone adds an item to the database its not automatically added to their favorites list?
i am credited with that 'Stick' app, and while i suggested it be put back into the database, it is Far from one of my favorites (until i need quick folder access, ^-^; ), :P
(Mebey a check box in the Add Entry page that says "Check to have entry added to your favorites list.")

OT V2:
Also checking out entries while writing this post just to make sure i had things right,
Can the name in the 'Suggested by' field on an entry be linked to a users favorite list?
as im lazy and some times i get curious as to what other apps a user has listed and i dont want to type in the search box, *nods* :P

okok, im done, ^-^;
Lates, :P

User avatar
Andrew Lee
Posts: 3052
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 am
Contact:

Re: Too many updates

#19 Post by Andrew Lee »

Andy, can you make it so that when someone adds an item to the database its not automatically added to their favorites list?
i am credited with that 'Stick' app, and while i suggested it be put back into the database, it is Far from one of my favorites (until i need quick folder access, ^-^; ), :P
(Mebey a check box in the Add Entry page that says "Check to have entry added to your favorites list.")
I have done that manually. That entry was created automatically during the migration to TPFC V2.0. Under the new system, I can't think of a reason why a user would want to add an app to the database if it is not a favorite. Anyway, there's always the "This app sucks" button, which will remove the app from a user's favorites.
Also checking out entries while writing this post just to make sure i had things right,
Can the name in the 'Suggested by' field on an entry be linked to a users favorite list?
as im lazy and some times i get curious as to what other apps a user has listed and i dont want to type in the search box, *nods* :P
Sounds good to me. I will make the change and see if anyone complains. :D

lajjal
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:18 pm

Re: Too many updates

#20 Post by lajjal »

Lots of good input.

Distrowatch may have nearly as many Linux/BSD/Solaris distros as you have apps. They are constantly updating just here and they all want to be at the top. There are a few things about his operation that may help.

First, an update is accepted only if it is openly published on the website. Updates from forums (like utorrent) are not allowed.
Second, a popularity ranking from 1 to 100 is maintained with an indicator showing if the distro is on the way up or down.
Third, bugfix releases are listed with one line in a minor update section on the side.
Fourth, the opening page is much longer.
Fifth, reviews of distros are listed if available.

As to Kidsafe, I am sorry to have ruffled their feathers but I still think they help make my point. As I noted in my initial post, there are two advantages to being at the top of the list. One is a nefarious attempt to gain exposure and the other is a way to get your app debugged and expanded because the app has not been planned well or tested. Kidsafe falls into that catagory . Their update log shows an app that was not thought through much at all when it was first posted, hence all the added features, and the bug list shows not much testing on their part. They left both tasks to this website's visitors. They just put some code out there and then respond to whatever happens. So, in answer to computerfreaker, the fact that he is going AFK (whatever that is) is irrelevant.

lajjal
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:18 pm

Re: Too many updates

#21 Post by lajjal »

Just a bit more.

I know that some of these things are being done here now but not as discrete elements. There are comments available and a popularity score but both are captive in the app listing.

freakazoid
Posts: 1212
Joined: Wed Jul 18, 2007 5:45 pm

Re: Too many updates

#22 Post by freakazoid »

Agreed with lajjal that some form of sitewide widget for app comments would be great! (similar to the Recent Forums Postings block in the right sidebar)
is it stealth? ;)

computerfreaker
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:46 pm

Re: Too many updates

#23 Post by computerfreaker »

lajjal, I'm going to be very blunt right now. I don't want a flame war, I don't want a fight, but I do want to correct several (damaging) statements you made. Hopefully we can have a peaceful & productive discussion.
lajjal wrote:As to Kidsafe, I am sorry to have ruffled their feathers but I still think they help make my point.
Disagreed. See the rest of my post.
lajjal wrote:So, in answer to computerfreaker, the fact that he is going AFK (whatever that is) is irrelevant.
AFK means "away from keyboard", which is where I was until I heard rumblings that all was not well. So here I am again. :twisted:
lajjal wrote:As I noted in my initial post, there are two advantages to being at the top of the list. One is a nefarious attempt to gain exposure and the other is a way to get your app debugged and expanded because the app has not been planned well or tested. Kidsafe falls into that catagory .
At least you've not tried accusing us of trying to abuse the site to gain exposure. :roll:
lajjal wrote:Their update log shows an app that was not thought through much at all when it was first posted, hence all the added features,
Part of that is correct.
KidSafe began as a 30-minute project to keep my little siblings from destroying my computer; as they began figuring out how to work around my simple fullscreen window (pressing the Start key, for example, re-shows the Taskbar), I began adding features to kill their workarounds (for example, by disabling the Start key and forcibly hiding the Taskbar). Eventually, KidSafe got enough features that I figured somebody else might use it; in my wildest dreams, I never expected the kind of reception KidSafe got. Others began requesting new features, and KidSafe grew from a simple fullscreen window (the very first, unreleased, version) to what you see today.
lajjal wrote:and the bug list shows not much testing on their part.
I can see where you're coming from on this one but you're still wrong.
My only computer is a laptop running XP Pro SP3 (32-bit), and many (perhaps even most) of the bugs have been discovered on Vista/7.
Sometimes I can't even reproduce a bug, and have to rely on other testers' reports to find & fix the problem. Problems with UAC are a perfect example of this, since XP has no UAC. Another problem - KidSafe only covering the first monitor of a multi-monitor setup - was almost as bad, since I only have a single monitor. Once again, it took a lot of feedback from my multi-monitor testers to fix the problem.
If you don't like the length of the changelog, I have two suggestions: #1 stop looking at it, or #2 help us test so we don't have to put out versions with unknown bugs. That way, we don't have to say things like "Fixed such-and-such bug (thanks to XXX for report)" because the bug will be been squashed before it ever sees the light of day.
btw, for the record, I have never released a version of KidSafe with a known bug aboard, and I'm quick to fix bugs that do make it out.
Also, if you take a second look at the changelog, you can see that KidSafe has gotten vastly more robust over the past month or two. Compare the 0.3X.0.0 changelog, for example, with that of 0.25.X.0; for example, 0.35.0.0 has one bugfix, while 0.25.4.0 and 0.25.5.0 had 3 fixes each.
There's been an average of one bugfix per release for the past several releases, and many of those bugfixes have been minor (one was a missing space in a label's caption).
That, at least to me, means people have run out of major/average bugs to report and are stuck looking for minor ones. There's a reason I'm comfortable signing off for a few weeks, and it's because I know I can leave without people getting BSOD's or the like as soon as I'm gone.
lajjal wrote:They left both tasks to this website's visitors.
IMHO, that's a cheap shot, and definitely uncalled for.
No, we haven't. Several of this website's members have contributed a great deal (special thanks to guinness, joby_toss, Onesimus Prime, and webfork!), but we never left everything up to you guys.
Feature requests: hey, I was done with my personal feature list a couple of months ago. I add new features because the users ask for them, just like any decent developer would do. Given that I'm the one doing the hard part - taking an idea and putting it into a concrete form - I'd hardly call requesting new features a "task".
Bug reports: if you guys can find a bug, I fix it. I test what I'm able to, but I'm doing much of this "in the dark" since I have no access to Vista/7.


lajjal, you apparently feel like being a sort of "armchair quarterback" - you're not part of the development team and you don't know what goes on internally, but somehow you feel justified to yell about decisions you don't know the logic behind. The accusations you made about KidSafe's feature growth, for example, are a prime example. If you wish to continue, I'd appreciate it if you take it into PM.
lajjal wrote:They just put some code out there and then respond to whatever happens.
That's true for all programs. The devs write some code, make sure it works for them, then put it out for anyone to see & use. Feature requests come in, and the devs respond. Bug reports come in, and the devs respond.

Have a good weekend!

computerfreaker

lajjal
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:18 pm

Re: Too many updates

#24 Post by lajjal »

Computerfreaker, I appreciate your comprehensive and thoughtful post. I have not said it directly but I think you have produced an excellent program and it goes after a difficult problem that has not really been addressed elsewhere.

I have only taken exception with how it was brought into the world. As you said in your last post, the program started as a small idea and has lead to something very cool. I contend that it should be hitting the main list about now and not after the first pass at making your idea real. The development process should have stayed in the forum until it was more complete. By doing it the way you did Kidsafe was continually back at the top of the latest list helping nobody but you because it got much more attention than if it stayed in the forum.

Thanks for defining AFK. I'm very good at all the acronyms.

computerfreaker
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:46 pm

Re: Too many updates

#25 Post by computerfreaker »

lajjal wrote:Computerfreaker, I appreciate your comprehensive and thoughtful post. I have not said it directly but I think you have produced an excellent program and it goes after a difficult problem that has not really been addressed elsewhere.
Thanks! I appreciate the support.
lajjal wrote:I have only taken exception with how it was brought into the world. As you said in your last post, the program started as a small idea and has lead to something very cool. I contend that it should be hitting the main list about now and not after the first pass at making your idea real. The development process should have stayed in the forum until it was more complete. By doing it the way you did Kidsafe was continually back at the top of the latest list helping nobody but you because it got much more attention than if it stayed in the forum.
Well, there's two sides to every story. On the one hand, the frequent updates brought several important people into the project. It also kept feedback coming frequently, and brought a lot of public support. Especially in KidSafe's earliest days, had public interest died, KidSafe probably would have too since I didn't visualize many people using it; there was also a fair amount of criticism going around, so I might have dropped it. On the other hand, I can see how having KidSafe keep popping back to the top of the update list would be irritating.
Fortunately, development has slowed down again. In fact, there's only 4 code-related tasks left at the moment: a bug on Win 7 64-bit (32-bit OS's not affected), an in-program feedback system, a little bit of artificial intelligence for the anti-abuse system, and one mildly bizarre feature I won't divulge. ;)
Other than that, all that's left is localizations, which won't require new releases of KidSafe.
We're at version 0.36.0.0 right now; I'm expecting all of the work to be done by 0.40.0.0, which will probably drop late in June. At that point, I'm not sure quite what will happen.
lajjal wrote:Thanks for defining AFK. I'm very good at all the acronyms.
No problem!

Cheers!

computerfreaker

User avatar
guinness
Posts: 4118
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2007 2:00 am
Contact:

Re: Too many updates

#26 Post by guinness »

Sorry, just updated the version numbers of some applications by adding 'V' this sends it straight to the start of the 'Latest RSS,' no intention was made to boost the popularity of the intended applications, simply cleaning the entries!

User avatar
Andrew Lee
Posts: 3052
Joined: Sat Feb 04, 2006 9:19 am
Contact:

Re: Too many updates

#27 Post by Andrew Lee »

@lajjal: I still don't quite see KidSafe's problem wrt TPFC updates. The actual updates to the entry were made on these dates:

2010-02-11, 2010-02-19. 2010-02-19, 2010-02-20, 2010-03-15, 2010-03-20, 2010-04-06, 2010-04-14, 2010-04-16, 2010-04-20

Now, with the possible exception of the period 02-19 to 02-20, the other updates look pretty spaced out to me. Even big projects like Filezilla and Firefox has ".1" release on the same/next day more times than I can remember.

The actual software change history may have been more frequent than that (and that is clearly a developer's preference; a good number prefer to release early, release often), but the updates to TPFC seem more than reasonable to me.

@computerfreaker: IMHO, KidSafe is a unique contribution to the freeware scene. It will undoubtedly save a lot of parents/babysitters countless hours of frustration. :D

lajjal
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:18 pm

Re: Too many updates

#28 Post by lajjal »

Point taken, mostly, and as I mentioned I think Kidsafe is a great app.

That said, I don't think it dilutes the larger point. I have been unhappy for some time with the way some apps use your main listing for undue exposure or as a place to develop their program and I feel that development should happen in the forum.

Ignoring Kidsafe still leaves numerous examples such as Simple Port Forwarding. Some time ago another great app, Fastcopy was the culprit. I think this will become a large problem as the portable world moves into the limelight and by then it may be much harder to fix. I think an app should have achieved a certain level of stability before it gets listed.

I know that my posts sometimes seem to have a bit of a rough edge and I am not sure why that happens to me but I really have only altruistic intentions.

computerfreaker
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Feb 13, 2010 9:46 pm

Re: Too many updates

#29 Post by computerfreaker »

Andrew Lee wrote:@lajjal: I still don't quite see KidSafe's problem wrt TPFC updates.
I don't think he's picking at KidSafe as much as trying to use it as an example of what could be a legitimate problem: apps sitting at the top of the update list too often.
With that said, though, I appreciate your support for our quick releases.
Andrew Lee wrote:The actual updates to the entry were made on these dates:

2010-02-11, 2010-02-19. 2010-02-19, 2010-02-20, 2010-03-15, 2010-03-20, 2010-04-06, 2010-04-14, 2010-04-16, 2010-04-20

Now, with the possible exception of the period 02-19 to 02-20, the other updates look pretty spaced out to me. Even big projects like Filezilla and Firefox has ".1" release on the same/next day more times than I can remember.
I just looked back over KidSafe's changelog for 02-19 through 02-21, and found the reason for those super-rapid releases: a couple of nasty bugs. Take a look at this:
KidSafe changelog wrote: * Bug fix: Command-line parameters were incorrectly parsed after a change in 0.25.6.0
* Bug fix: trying to use the "Administrator unlock" feature could lock up KidSafe under certain circumstances (thanks to Onesimus Prime and rcmaehl for report and rcmaehl for fix)
* Bug fix: Preferences file couldn't be created under certain circumstances, resulting in a perpetual preference-setting and restarting cycle (thanks to rcmaehl for report)
Once those were fixed, the dev cycle slowed down again (note the long delay between 0.25.7.0 and 0.28.0.0). For now, development has actually stopped (for the public at least; internal development is fairly busy, and will get busier in a few weeks).
Andrew Lee wrote:The actual software change history may have been more frequent than that (and that is clearly a developer's preference; a good number prefer to release early, release often), but the updates to TPFC seem more than reasonable to me.
Thanks!
Yes, we definitely like to release early & very often. It keeps users happy, particularly when they report a bug or two and it's fixed within 24 hours.
Andrew Lee wrote:@computerfreaker: IMHO, KidSafe is a unique contribution to the freeware scene. It will undoubtedly save a lot of parents/babysitters countless hours of frustration. :D
Thank you very much! :D
lajjal wrote:Point taken, mostly, and as I mentioned I think Kidsafe is a great app.

That said, I don't think it dilutes the larger point. I have been unhappy for some time with the way some apps use your main listing for undue exposure or as a place to develop their program and I feel that development should happen in the forum.

Ignoring Kidsafe still leaves numerous examples such as Simple Port Forwarding. Some time ago another great app, Fastcopy was the culprit. I think this will become a large problem as the portable world moves into the limelight and by then it may be much harder to fix. I think an app should have achieved a certain level of stability before it gets listed.

I know that my posts sometimes seem to have a bit of a rough edge and I am not sure why that happens to me but I really have only altruistic intentions.
Interesting point.
I can imagine people and situations where this kind of abuse could become likely; the problem, though, is setting limits.
* If apps aren't allowed to be listed until they're "stable", how do you define stable? You can't necessarily look at release count, because some apps release frequently and some release infrequently. You can't look at how long an app's been released, since some apps undergo a lot of internal testing before anybody else even gets to see the app name, let alone the app itself. You can't ask anybody, because the results will vary by the person you ask.
* If app updates can only be listed once every N days, do emergency bugfixes bypass the limit? If so, what counts as an "emergency bugfix"?

The problem, as always, is that these are subjective things. What one person says is almost certainly not what another person will say, and a user will (almost?) always return a different viewpoint than a developer. A tester may even return a different viewpoint than a developer.

I don't think a quick-release model is a bad thing; in fact, I think it's a good thing. It encourages more stability (since bugs get fixed quickly) and more features (since RFE's get handled quickly, too). For most apps, getting "pinned" to the top of the update list is simply an unfortunate byproduct of this, instead of a deliberate attempt to get publicity or whatever.

Cheers!

computerfreaker

lajjal
Posts: 82
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 12:18 pm

Re: Too many updates

#30 Post by lajjal »

Another great comprehensive post computerfreaker. I am not saying I have the answers but I think there are some very sharp minds around here and I hope a discussion will bring new ideas to the fore.

I do have one direct suggestion. I think an app should get an initial listing with all the details in the center of the page as now. Bugfix releases, however frequent or infrequent, should be listed with one line on the side of the page and if the entry is selected it goes to the original full entry. The full entry can be amended to flesh out the bugfix if necessary.

That's my 2 cents. I hope others will be drawn to this thread to try and develop new ideas rather than talk about individual applications. That's really my fault because I set things off in the wrong direction at the beginning by attacking one app as an example.

Post Reply