problem with 6.9.1.7beta ?

[edkiefer]

I just noticed newest listed on site is 6.9.1.5beata but this morning i am at beta7 .

Is there problem or just routine changes .

Edit:  everything seems to be working fine .

[BenYeeHua]

I just got a validate for the license, after it validate, said it is ok and I clicked the button, it don't showing out on the Tray Icon...
And I just killed PL process to see it showing up again.

[edkiefer]

yes, I got that validation message .
I didn't look at "about PL"

instead of my name it says "thank you for purchasing PL "

Edit: I see 6.9.1.9beta and I can change the name I want shown .
So all seems ok .

[edkiefer]

Jeremy Check PM , there seems to be issue with 6.9.2.2 activation , the last beta worked ok but this is not letting me activate as support page is showing expired under terms .

[Jeremy Collake]

The reason you didn't see anything in the system tray after validation was due to a bug with the manifests.

An important problem, I'd say. EDIT: Though can be fixed by a simple reboot.

I saw it, but thought it was something else -- then caught 5 minutes *after* I released 6.9.2.2.

I now *embed* all the manifests, which greatly simplifies the design. The old design that let users choose to run Lasso elevated or not caused substantial issues from the increased complexity, as you can imagine!

So, after I pulled a 'Microsoft', I ended up with v6.9.2.4. This seems entirely good with the new embedded manifests. PLEASE let me know if not, and I continue testing here.. though AM pretty confident since these embedded manifests remove so much possibly of error.

[Jeremy Collake]

So.. the problem wasn't *that* bad, I've had much worse. But it was something that I shouldn't have let slip through.

The end solution greatly simplified and improved the product. So many bugs in the past were due to manifest issues. No more of that crap.

ALL software companies have these issues. Why do I rush new finals out? Honestly, it's a lot to do about revenue. I have to get shit out the door and keep moving.

All in all, it'll be fine, was a solid release, and very few will have been affected by the 6.9.2.2 issue, only a small percent of those who did an automatic update of it.

Also, I'm glad my own testing caught the issue, even if it was a few minutes too late.

[Jeremy Collake]

Official explanation:

"There was a little mistake in the publishing of Process Lasso 6.9.2.2. It wasn't big, wasn't serious, but needed correction. We saw it in our own test beds 5 minutes after 6.9.2.2 went final. So, we pulled 6.9.2.2 and published 6.9.2.4, which tests good and is a solid build. With change there is always risk, though we mitigate it as best we can, and this was more an embarrassment than any serious issue. We published under a new version to prevent confusion, as opposed to sweep this short-lived small mistake under the rug. The mistake involved packaging of manifest files."

And do note it's not like I've not had to publish new builds real fast before, over something silly and stupid. BUT, this time I'm being open. I hope it doesn't backfire. Believe me when I say Bitsum's software is of equal or superior quality to even the largest software corps.

[edkiefer]

So.. the problem wasn't *that* bad, I've had much worse. But it was something that I shouldn't have let slip through.

The end solution greatly simplified and improved the product. So many bugs in the past were due to manifest issues. No more of that crap.

ALL software companies have these issues. Why do I rush new finals out? Honestly, it's a lot to do about revenue. I have to get shit out the door and keep moving.

All in all, it'll be fine, was a solid release, and very few will have been affected by the 6.9.2.2 issue, only a small percent of those who did an automatic update of it.

Also, I'm glad my own testing caught the issue, even if it was a few minutes too late.

Ok, used new activation code and it worked .
so all is fine .

[Jeremy Collake]

Well, almost -- still need to look into your key. As I said, only < 5% of registered users will see that validation dialog. I'm rolling it out slow so that I can carefully keep an eye on it.

I *think* the issue with your old key is the way I assigned it caused the activation system to think it was expired. I need to trace the logic path through the system and make sure similar keys are handled right!

Thanks for reporting this guys, had I taken BenYeeHua's report (and my observation earlier) of a missing system tray icon after validation, I could have maybe caught this.

p.s. Worst case scenario was that the user had to reboot, then Lasso would functional normally. BUT, final releases are serious business for me, so I get pretty amped up and take any issue seriously.

[edkiefer]

Official explanation:

"There was a little mistake in the publishing of Process Lasso 6.9.2.2. It wasn't big, wasn't serious, but needed correction. We saw it in our own test beds 5 minutes after 6.9.2.2 went final. So, we pulled 6.9.2.2 and published 6.9.2.4, which tests good and is a solid build. With change there is always risk, though we mitigate it as best we can, and this was more an embarrassment than any serious issue. We published under a new version to prevent confusion, as opposed to sweep this short-lived small mistake under the rug. The mistake involved packaging of manifest files."

And do note it's not like I've not had to publish new builds real fast before, over something silly and stupid. BUT, this time I'm being open. I hope it doesn't backfire. Believe me when I say Bitsum's software is of equal or superior quality to even the largest software corps.

Sure, I have been there too .
It can be two steps forward , one step backwards many times .

[edkiefer]

Well, almost -- still need to look into your key. As I said, only < 5% of registered users will see that validation dialog. I'm rolling it out slow so that I can carefully keep an eye on it.

I *think* the issue with your old key is the way I assigned it caused the activation system to think it was expired. I need to trace the logic path through the system and make sure similar keys are handled right!

Thanks for reporting this guys, had I taken BenYeeHua's report (and my observation earlier) of a missing system tray icon after validation, I could have maybe caught this.

p.s. Worst case scenario was that the user had to reboot, then Lasso would functional normally. BUT, final releases are serious business for me, so I get pretty amped up and take any issue seriously.

It is odd , one time it showed n/a or unavailable , then it went to expired when I refreshed page . then went back to n/a or unavailable , and last seemed to stay on expire after that .
That all happened within a hr or so .
PS: of course I didn't try the old activation , FWIW .

[Jeremy Collake]

That doesn't surprise me.

The activation and licensing system needs some serious maintenance.

I will begin work on it as soon as I finish the new 'ProBalance Insights' dialog, or maybe sooner.

[BenYeeHua]

So I guess maybe you need to do what's doing by the notepad++, delay pushing the release update for the user until it is 1-2 weeks old, unless they tick something like the "Don't delay the release update for weeks" or "Include beta versions".

Of cause if this don't need too much resource, and if you think you should add this "failsafe" by avoiding too much people updating to a build that might be having issues.

And based on many software in China, unless it is very important update(like the servers no longer supported this version), the software will not update automatic, even it know that is a newer version released, until the user for a manual update by checking the update.

[edkiefer]

There 2 ways to do this , you can release internal beta's and then release after set time with delay like you mention .
that might be pain for small outfit like PL .

I think what would work is release beta like we do now ,most user probably don't tick the beta field or update manually like we do so after last beta version before final, don't change anything in code so final = last tested beta .
Which hopefully found bugs if any but you never know on PC with such wide variance of HW/setup's

[BenYeeHua]

Yup, most of them will just push another small version bump like XX.0.1 to fix the bug after the released come out for awhile, it can be after release they found some more bug reported by the user, or they just wanna follow the schedule to release each month, then fix some bug that will take some time, and release it.

[Jeremy Collake]

The delay before pushing out updates is an interesting solution. That way you can instantly release new versions, but not push them out.

another company did the same. They'd push out an update slowly over the course of a week, in 30% increments.

I will do what I can to mitigate this issue going forward. I am thinking all I need is a few day delay. By allowing users to opt-out of the delay, I also won't have to hear from complainers who say: "Where is the update for the latest version?!?"

The only caveat is making it work with existing systems. I'll see what I can do!

[BenYeeHua]

The delay before pushing out updates is an interesting solution. That way you can instantly release new versions, but not push them out.

another company did the same. They'd push out an update slowly over the course of a week, in 30% increments.

I will do what I can to mitigate this issue going forward. I am thinking all I need is a few day delay. By allowing users to opt-out of the delay, I also won't have to hear from complainers who say: "Where is the update for the latest version?!?"

The only caveat is making it work with existing systems. I'll see what I can do!

I think maybe by checking the release data of the newest version by Process Lasso, or it is a Important update, then thinking it should download or not?
It might be easy for checking the modified data of the files that it is download(HTTP provide this data) if there is no Important update, but I am not sure how the system working, so this might be worst(like because of beta release the delay will increased), especially when there are many stable release in a week.

Or maybe provide another update channel(delayed update channel) like the beta channel, for people that don't need delay, and it can auto push the update from stable channel to delayed update channel by server after weeks, or manually.

[edkiefer]

6.9.2.11beta has problem with updater saying there new version, even though its still .11b

[Jeremy Collake]

Thanks for the heads up ed!

I fixed it. If you hadn't told me, it'd had persisted.

[BenYeeHua]

I am not sure when it is "fixed", but it look like Windows is showing "Process Lasso" shortcut as the first result now, not the "Reset Process Lasso to Defaults".
Can it be the fixing of manifests causing it?
---
Just do a quick check on the shortcut:
"Process Lasso" shortcut:"C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ProcessLassoLauncher.exe" /nodelay
"Reset Process Lasso to Defaults" shortcut:"C:\Program Files\Process Lasso\ProcessLasso.exe" /default

So I guess it can be Windows think it should be PLLauncher first, as I run it once before.
But I wonder when this shortcut changed, and did this change causing the position "fixed"...

[Jeremy Collake]

The old 'Reset to defaults' shortcut hasn't been created by the installer for a while. However, it's still there from prior versions. This is something I need to clean up in the PostUpdate module (but may not get to it immediately). Temporarily, I resolved problems by removing the '/defaults' switch for Lasso, so that that shortcut just launches Lasso.

[Jeremy Collake]

And I'm honestly not sure why the ordering changed... maybe due to most recently updated, that's probable.

[BenYeeHua]

Me too, like the notepad and notepad++ shortcut, it is notepad first, then notepad++, as the default txt is open by using notepad, so Windows arrange the most used software on top.
Even I manual run notepad++ by using start menu, it still below the notepad.

But in this case, it should be ProcessLasso.exe running most of the time, so I has no idea....