Do Something About Thinking That a Mere 3 Hours for Beta Testing the SDK is Acceptable
closed
meronmks ／ めろん
There was only a mere 3-hour window for the distribution of the official version of SDK 3.5.0 this time. Despite the platform VRChat engaging in activities such as UI translation and seemingly targeting people worldwide, there was absolutely no consideration given to creators in different time zones. Frankly, I consider this lack of consideration to be a disrespectful act, especially given the global reach of the platform.
I would like to understand why the beta testing period for this disruptive change was deemed acceptable within a mere 3-hour timeframe. Is it the belief that beta testing for future disruptive changes can also be confined to just 3 hours? I hope to receive some form of response or explanation.
P.S. While I am a Japanese speaker, I find it somewhat ridiculous to go through the trouble of translating this post into English.
以下日本語原文
今回のSDK3.5.0の正式版の配布までにたったの3時間しかありませんでした。
これはVRChatというプラットフォームがUIの翻訳などを行っておりもはや世界中の人をターゲットにしていると思われる中、タイムゾーンの異なるクリエイターへの配慮が全く無く、正直人を舐めてる行為と思います。
今回の破壊的変更へのβがなぜ3時間で良いと思ったのか、今後も破壊的変更へのβもたった3時間で良いと思っているのですか？
なにかしらの形で回答が得られることを期待します。
P.S. 私は日本語話者ですがわざわざ英語にしてこの投稿を作るのもバカバカしいと思っています。
Log In
Momo the Monster
marked this post as
closed
We've been doing Open Beta tests for both the SDK and VCC with more frequency to increase the amount of time that authors have to test their packages.
meronmks ／ めろん
The announcement related to the recent controversy has been posted on Discord (https://discord.com/channels/189511567539306508/336764577301659649/1184212517757661274). From my interpretation, the statement suggests that, regarding this 'Breaking' update, it was released as a stable version because it had been thoroughly tested, and there was a desire to transition quickly to 2022. However, despite this, the statement also mentions that there's no rush for users to make the transition, leaving us unclear about the intended course of action with the stable release.
It's not entirely clear why this confusion occurred. Was it intentional to disrupt content completely? Well, there are already visible instances of content being disrupted within my scope, and some individuals have given up, rendering it a bit too late.
The response "Got it, heard loud and clear. 🙏 We didn't plan it that way, and we kinda had our hand forced. Apologies if we caused issues!" is appreciated, and I hope this single statement truly reflects future actions. I sincerely wish that creators who bring joy to this world will not dwindle further due to these circumstances.
日本語原文
Discordのアナウンス( https://discord.com/channels/189511567539306508/336764577301659649/1184212517757661274 )にて今回の騒動に絡んでいると思われる声明が出ました、私の読み取った認識では今回の
Breaking
アップデートに限ってはテストしつくされてるし、早く2022へ移行してほしかったから安定版としてリリースしたと書かれてますが、その割には移行は急がなくてよいと書いていたり結局我々にどう動いて欲しく安定版を出したのかがよくわかりませんでした。この混乱でコンテンツを破壊しつくせばよかったのでしょうかね？まあもうすでに私の見える範囲でもいくつか目に見える形で破壊されてしまったコンテンツがありますし、諦めてしまった人もいるので手遅れなことですが。
> Got it, heard loud and clear. 🙏 We didn't plan it that way, and we kinda had our hand forced. Apologies if we caused issues!
この一文が今後の行動でしっかり示され、この世界で楽しい事を考えてくれるクリエイターの方々がこれ以上いなくならないことを願います。
Haï~
meronmks ／ めろん: For my part, this "Got it, loud and clear" message is NOT appreciated.
The whole announcement is yet another instance of a continued series of disrespect towards its creators. We have an update, which was supposed to be just a technical workaround, and now it's been retconned as an actual release. VRChat has not having made any blog post about that release, and no Twitter communication to advertise the release, so no, this isn't a release, it's a cop out that they can afford because no one will stand in their way.
VRChat should have rang the alarm bells and rollback, putting an halt to the open beta immediately. Instead what we have here is a platform that now has learned that it can force the hand of all of its tool creators to instantly assess an update without suffering any consequence from its actions.
meronmks ／ めろん
Haï~: I don't intend to fully forgive through this message myself. It's more of a sense of "bewilderment" than "anger" at this point. Putting it into words seems so easy, doesn't it? It's just that we, who are expressing our thoughts here, don't seem to fit the definition of creators according to VRChat.
日本語原文
私自身もこのメッセージで完全に許したというつもりはありません。
ただ、「怒り」というよりはもう「呆れてしまった」んです。言葉にするのだけなら簡単だろって。
VRChatの言うクリエイターに今ここに書き込んでいる我々は居ないのだと。
Sayamame
Note that if there is no
-beta.1
or something, no matter how you think about it, it is considered as the OFFICIAL RELEASE.VCC problems caused by the existence of beta flags should only be addressed by fixing VCC bugs, not by removing the beta flags.
anatawa12
Where's communication about VRCSDK 3.5.0 with creators?
In the last developer update in 2022, You guys declared VRChat will Increase Communication with Creators.
However, I feel there are no communication about VRCSDK 3.5.0.
They released VRCSDK 3.5.0 beta unpredictably, and stabilized unpredictably within 3 hours.
If you gave us enough time to support VRCSDK 3.5.x, It's likely to release tool versions that supports VRCSDK 3.5.x and users will not face tool problems with Unity 2022.
(I think 1 week is minimum for breaking releases but about 1 month is suitable for big changes like Unity version migration.)
However, for VRCSDK 3.5.0, there are NO advance notice that release VRCSDK 3.5.0 immediately after beta release, even in yesterday Developer Update.
For developers in different timezone, there were no beta SDK since it's while sleeping.
We (I and some friend that develops tools for VRCSDK) were waiting long time for beta releases VRCSDK that supports Unity 2022, to verify and provide versions supports VRCSDK with Unity 2022.
SCAF
"We've re-published the packages for 3.5.0-beta.1 as 3.5.0 in order to fix some issues with version comparisons for community packages. They are otherwise the same, but no longer require prerelease packages to be turned on in order to use them." - Tupper, in VRC Discord Server.
It is the same beta just renamed.
Bunkerotter
SCAF: While this is true, it's a very bad "workaround" for that, as for someone who doesn't know that 3.5.0 is beta, might think it's just another point release. Maybe they should look in to how beta releases could be better integrated, or rather, how the version comparison can deal with that.
To be honest, they should just use proper semantic version, and that new version should be 4.0, as it is a breaking change to use a newer version of unity.
Sayamame
Bunkerotter: Since this Developer Update, the VRCSDK does not follow Semver.
Therefore, it is correct that updating Unity-compatible Version is 3.5.x.
Bunkerotter
Sayamame: Why do people use something else then semantic versioning...
It's so simple and effective. But nooo, let's just use our own thing.