Website: http://infrarecorder.sourceforge.net/
Thx
You are here
Infra Recorder
February 28, 2008 - 11:46am
#1
Infra Recorder
February 28, 2008 - 12:01pm
#2
Already in progress
Actually, there are already two different versions of this out there..
John did one that got into pre-release a few months ago of 0.43.1 - https://portableapps.com/node/8035
And someone else recently did an unofficial version of 0.44.1 - https://portableapps.com/node/11632
According to search
https://portableapps.com/search/node/infrarecorder it seems to be a very popular app.
February 28, 2008 - 12:03pm
#3
In Testing
It's already in beta testing, there's one here and one here. Check them out.
Also, in the future, please provide more information in your Request post, follwing these guidelines, and please use the search feature located at the top right of this page, you'll often find your answer much more quickly.
Edit: I'm too slow lol
February 28, 2008 - 12:06pm
#4
Welcome
Welcome to PortableApps.com
The search box is pretty useful, it found this:
InfraRecorder Portable 0.43.1 Pre-Release 4 (Testers Needed)
Edit:
Dang nabbit! Well I always like forums with too much response instead of too little!
February 29, 2008 - 12:16am
#5
Oh What The Heck
Everyone else is making comments a minute too late, so I'll make mine 12 hours and 15 minutes late, just to fit in.
Welcome to PortableApps.com
InfraRecorder is already in testing here, just in need of an update an official release.
Should I put an edit? Yea sure.
Edit: Lol, whoops... you guys beat me to it! 
February 29, 2008 - 6:32am
#6
LOL, That's good!
LOL, That's good!
March 2, 2008 - 12:45pm
#7
I wonder about these
I wonder about these InfraRecorder requests, coming up so often 
Because a portable Version is already available at the original download-site:
http://infrarecorder.sourceforge.net/?page_id=5
Or is this just about packing it into a PAF?
March 2, 2008 - 6:36pm
#8
PAF
It's about PAF, always about PAF. As well, I don't know if that portable version was out when John did his.
March 2, 2008 - 6:54pm
#9
It was
I have it on PStart...
If a packet hits a pocket on a socket on a port,
and the bus is interrupted as a very last resort,
and the address of the memory makes your floppy disk abort,
then the socket packet pocket has an error to report 
March 2, 2008 - 7:52pm
#10
Cant the already
Cant the already portable-version from infrarec-site be packed as PAF very fast and easily? I think there is no need for beta-testing etc... I dont need PAF-Version, but it would be cool to have it anyway, because these request are annoying
March 2, 2008 - 7:57pm
#11
ALWAYS TEST
atreiju,
ALWAYS TEST!
Better Safe Than Sorry.
I hate revision 2, revision 3, re-releases 
Makes us look bad
Tim
March 3, 2008 - 3:28am
#12
Noncense.. sortof
Testing is good, but there's something like overkill. When an application is made portable, and initial beta releases work well, sometimes some issues will be ironed out. I'm all for a good beta test period. But when the application of one of the first betas works well, and as a matter of fact I use some beta releases still, I wonder what happens when a month passes without reports of issues?
Time passes and people start using Beta apps just because of the lack of saying, ok, we tested it for a while and no issues have turned up, lets make it a real release.
Maybe we all hate revision 2 and 3 re-releases, but it does not make us look bad. It makes us look like if there is an issue, we deal with it and release a fixed version.
Releasing some Betas and then never publish it... The forum posts fade away upto a part that no-one even dares to resurrect the old post... new versions arrive... and then start all over again...?
In the case of InfraRecorder (the old Beta), I'm using it instead of the regular version. But when new versions come and go, and there is no new PAF version it might look like the portable version is abandoned. When a user comes along and creates a PAF of a later version there's commotion about "there's already one' etc.
I just want a CD burner, and rather have a portable one. (My CD Burner is so old, the software that came with it now belongs in a museum.)
Beta testing is good, is needed. But also a release is needed. I rather have a revision than a Beta. And maybe we can't do without both.
But I disagree a revision will make us look bad.
March 3, 2008 - 8:13am
#13
and I
agree with you... we are getting plenty of working good beta tests...
If a packet hits a pocket on a socket on a port,
and the bus is interrupted as a very last resort,
and the address of the memory makes your floppy disk abort,
then the socket packet pocket has an error to report
March 3, 2008 - 8:21am
#14
Well stated!
Nuf said
Clair
March 3, 2008 - 8:24am
#15
I'm With Tim
I think revisions do make us look bad. And many apps have been sitting in beta way to long, but others need some good testing, there's always the few odd people of the ones testing with a problem that would have been much worse had the app been released.
March 3, 2008 - 8:44am
#16
yes
but those are the apps that goes trough the whole process...
there are always exceptions...
If a packet hits a pocket on a socket on a port,
and the bus is interrupted as a very last resort,
and the address of the memory makes your floppy disk abort,
then the socket packet pocket has an error to report
March 6, 2008 - 1:15am
#17
PuTTY, Notepad++, and GIMP
That, is why revisions make us look bad. I mean, not creating a settings directory causing settings not to be saved. Testing is certainly needed.
March 9, 2008 - 6:20am
#18
Yeah, testing is needed
But
Yeah, testing is needed
But it's not the end of the world.
Maybe revisions helps a SF.net top 3 position
So forget for a moment about all these things that 'make us look bad' and switch to 'looks like we care' for a while. No software is without bugs, errors, issues, etc.
Else me might end up with apps being in beta longer than MicroSoft takes to shelve out another version of Windows.
March 9, 2008 - 6:30am
#19
Good
point, we could end up in a Google style infinate beta!
March 3, 2008 - 12:27pm
#20
@ ALL
To all replies above in this SubThread as of 11:25am today.
Please note, I said "always test"
I did not say "go back to Alpha/Step 1"
A one week Beta/RC1 would not kill anyone.
"Beta" safe than sorry ;-P
Tim
Visit the Community page
Join our forums