Beta vs Stable
-
salvuccino last edited byThanks for your answer, but according to https://www.opera.com/computer/beta :
"Why so many versions of Opera?
Opera for computer has a fast and iterative development cycle. Updates are normally prepared in three stages.In the first experimental phase, updates are introduced into the flow of Opera developer. From here, when they become more stable, they switch to Opera beta. Finally, after the last adjustments, they are released in the stable version of Opera, the one used by most users. "
Users of beta software expect to have something between "stable" and "developer" channels, but that's not the case... The regular flow of changes/versions should be developer --> beta --> stable.
-
-
salvuccino last edited by
Mmmh, according to the text (and to how a regular dev flow is supposed to work), updates move from "Opera developer" to "Opera beta" and then, when everything is tested, they are supposed to be promoted to Opera stable.
In this case, there are changes that are available in the Stable release, but not in beta. It's not a big deal, but since (for Opera) betas may be "behind" the stable releases, I have to decide if it still makes sense to use it or if it's better to switch to Stable.
-
-
salvuccino last edited by
As a software engineer, I always prefer to have a beta version ahead of stable in terms of fixes/updates/features.
There's an interesting thread about it on Opera blogs and I'm not alone
:"In a serious company that respects its own words/statements the beta reaches a point where there are no bugs left to fix so the last version of it is being promoted to stable. In this case -as in almost every other case in the past- if you check the changelogs, "theoretically" Opera beta was ready to be promoted at version 3255.27 in April, 9th. At this point both stable and beta should have the same build number, stable does not need any further updates by definition and the next stream with the new "locked" developement features goes to the other stream (beta) to get its bugs fixed, in this case 61. The situation is the following though lol, stable left out the oven so early (like always) and because it is so broken it acts like the beta, so stable and beta are updated at the same time to 3255.37, 3255.56, 3255.57, 3255.59, 3255.60, now to 3255.70 and will get probably at least 5 updates more. Now you are welcome to laugh with everybody else, usual fanbois of this blog excluded of course. For them this is just normal."
In any case, I'll likely switch to stable, because if beta is not always ahead of stable (=being able to test/use recent fixes), it makes no sense to use it.
-
leocg Moderator Volunteer last edited by
And that's what usually happens with Opera. Developer is ahead of beta that is ahead of stable.
However there will alway be a period of time before the next cycle start when developer may be behind beta and it may be behind stable. Most of the times it last a few days.Anyway, what I use to say is to choose a stream and forget about the others.
-
salvuccino last edited by
I would do the same, but it's a pity that using Opera Beta I'm affected by issues that are resolved in Opera Stable.
Opera Beta should be aligned (at least) to .70.
-
donq last edited by
It is possible that latest pre-stable beta and stable share exactly same code, although stable has greater version number. IIRC one of Opera developers told that few years ago
-
salvuccino last edited by salvuccino
The problem is that they don't share the same code... I'm not complaining about the version number, the problem is that latest beta is not updated as latest stable. And that's simply weird: a beta is supposed to "be promoted" to Stable once that it's stable enough...
Who's using Opera Beta is still affected by issues solved in Opera Stable: they should make "v.70" available also in the beta channel (I don't care if they call it .70, .71 or whatever...). Instead, Opera Beta is stuck at the "old" .60 release, so we're missing a bulk of fixes:
60.0.3255.70 – 2019-04-26 blog post
DNA-75464 Crash at base::Time::Explode(bool, base::Time::Exploded*)
DNA-76582 [WinLin] New tab button hover state should look like inactive hovered tab
DNA-76909 Crash at views::BridgedNativeWidgetImpl::SetParent(NSView*)
DNA-76938 Rate Opera – black text on gray background
DNA-76963 [Mac] Crashes with easy setup panel
DNA-77341 Extensions actions should be hidden in overflow menu when they occupy more than 1/3 of toolbar size.
DNA-77346 Use bigger tiles after update to R3 for some users
DNA-77347 [Mac] Tab preview stuck when dragging tab
DNA-77350 [Mac] The location services disable button brings up an empty popup
DNA-77361 Crash at opera::PageView::is_locked()
DNA-77390 Previous wallpaper color blinks when focusing tab with start page
DNA-77403 Tailor font size for fallback tiles
DNA-77545 Opera crashes when trying to create snapI don't get it: how much effort is actually needed to release Opera_beta_60.0.3255.70_Setup_x64.exe ?
-
donq last edited by
@Salvuccino
Well, I had not looked at changelog - looks like my assumption was incorrect, sorry.
But then yes, I too agree that Opera should release beta (and dev) version, matching stable (and beta) one. I'm on dev channel and actually don't care so much - but current scheme is not logical.
