So RC1 was released 27.11.2019, since then using my limited judgement, there is still a mountain of issues present - UI, performance being bad, editor freezes etc.
Unity probably wants to release v2019.3 in year 2019 . That gives them max 1 more week before all the holiday season kicks in. Even if released end of week, itās pretty risky in my opinion to release brand new version just before holidays when probably 50% of stuff is not available for support.
To combat this, I would expect this subforum to be buzzling with activity, releases DAILY, user feedback and quick turnover with bugfuxes.
I see none of that, and my gut feeling says, as in the past, Unity will release another bugged version, fire and forget-style, and fix it in 2020. This is pretty saddening to see such approach still prevelant in this company. Up until now I was always withholding with updating to newer version for like a 2 months after release, and there is no sign that my approach should change .
Itās not all bad, from what Iāve managed to establish they are already on f3 internally. Why they are already on f3 and still not even released f2 however is wellā¦ a mystery.
If stability is what you want you need to wait for LTS releases. The tech releases have not been stable ever since LTS was announced. TBH I think they should rename .1-.3 as āunstableā and LTS as āstableā because thats really what is happening, despite the masquerade.
They didnāt release f2 last week so maybe they skipped f2 due to major bugs or something like that.
Why would they do that? labeling it as unstable would discourage people from using it at all. Itās not recommended to upgrade to tech releases if you have something in production because stability is usually more important. But I wouldnāt go as far as saying that the tech releases are unstable.
The label of unstable fits beta/alphas a lot more.
2019 cycle full releases have suffered from major errors such as crashes etc just as much as alpha and beta versions when working on any of our client projects using these versions. This is tested across more than 40 machines and multiple developers so its not just an individual case. I personally would call that unstable, not sure what is more unstable than regular crashes in a non-beta applicationā¦
Anyway original point is that you should use LTS if you want stability as the other versions cannot be trusted to be stable (as in what would normally be considered stable in any other commercial software, its only unity we have these issues with on a āstableā version).
This is exactly why current situation is wrong. Itās baffling how a software which goes through multiple stages of alpha, beta, and patch releases is still considered unstable by itās customers. The feature of Tech releases should not be the fact they are unstable, but that they depreciate/introduce new APIās or components, which potentially cripple ongoing projects.
And I would not call LTS version stable either, the nested prefabs are ridden with bugs to this day and they manifest in LTS as well as in Tech releases evenly.
f1 (RC1) canāt even build Android apps, the SDK errors are unfixable.
The Editor in b12 and f1 complain about being old and f2 being out, but itās not.
Bugs and issues are pretty much the same accross 2019.3b and 2020.1a, getting patched at the same time too, so it really beats me why bother?
The silence and notice from Unity staff missing is what is actually more annoying to me, than the issue at hand.
Iām building for android with 2019.3.0f1, so that claim is a bit broad. My project is still quite small and maily developed on 2019.2 and 2019.3 betas so I do see, that you might have a lot of other problems with older sdks. And to be fair, I do have problems using the ProGuard Minify option ( https://forum.unity.com/threads/unfortunately-your-game-has-stopped-unity-2019-3-0f1.791967/#post-5275254 ), but wellā¦ it is not the official release version but kind of still labeled as beta. Sure, i would love to have a more reliable version for the first release candidate, but keep the beta context in mind.
I actually would also love to get mre information on the current status quo for the final release candidate. I guess the matter of fact that there are still some major problems in f1 results in trying to silently fixing the problems as fast as possilbe. I would love to see them take the other route by acknowledging the problems and being open about the internal schedules, but itās their call to make. In the end itās better if they release a solid 19.3, rahter than a rushed one. @rastlin Good point with the holidays though, it will be interesting to see how that plays out.
This needs to be addressed ASAP. I canāt believe thereās a fix being tested for 2020.1 but just āplannedā for 2019.3, which comes way earlier. Canāt see the point of including the brand new Device Simulator in 2019.3 and then have a basic Android build thing broken.
The issue tracker case youāre pointing out is about the misleading message. The changes that are currently being reviewed for 2020.1 and are planned to be backported to 2019.3 are about the messaging.
Issue #1 should no longer occur with the upcoming Hub 2.3.0 release. In the meantime, you can use this workaround and manually unblock yourself.
. That gives them max 1 more week before all the holiday season kicks in. Even if released end of week, itās pretty risky in my opinion to release brand new version just before holidays when probably 50% of stuff is not available for support.
.
and then patch it for 3-6 months until 2020.1 and 2019.4 LTS launch. 