Support Board
Date/Time: Tue, 24 Dec 2024 02:18:12 +0000
Post From: Notice: Suggestions (Currently not accepting)
| [2015-03-27 02:52:41] |
| |
|
Hello, We have occasionally put out a notice like this and we have thought of saying something recently but did not, but we will say something. Recently we have been getting a large number of suggestions. They seem to be coming fast and furious. In most cases, there just is no hope of any consideration of these, and they are briefly looked at and not logged. We have a lot of critical development we are working on. Definitely a lot of small new features, and a lot of critical development which would not be categorized as new features. But important things for the core program. Update: Part of what we are doing is catching up on long overdue development which has already been requested. When it comes to a feature request, which is not in high demand, two things have to be met if it really is important to a particular user. They have to be willing to pay in part for the time to develop it and we need to have the time to develop it. In most cases someone does not want to pay for it and we do not have the time. Usually the way these payments are handled, is that it would be less than 50% of the cost since the feature becomes part of Sierra Chart. The reason that we sometimes will request a payment is a way to ensure that the feature request that is not commonly asked for, is really important to someone. If it is not and they are not willing to pay anything for it, then it would not usually be worth our time especially with all that we have to do. You also need to consider that Sierra Chart is very inexpensive to begin with. Also, if you do not have a direct paid Sierra Chart account and instead have an account through a reseller/affiliate, because we receive a significantly reduced price, this is another reason why we will require a payment for a feature request that is not normally going to be added to Sierra Chart. This is an fairness to our direct paid users and for all of the reasons already stated. With as many suggestions we are seeing, most of them simply are not being considered at all. It is critical that we catch up on the development that is long overdue and get features done that have not been done for a long time now. So please, avoid posting feature requests at this time. Sometimes someone posts a feature request and hopes for an answer and hope that is going to be done right away. There is 0% possibility of this in many cases. We cannot possibly keep up with this. At this point, if you see your request marked as a "User Discussion" it means it was reviewed, and not logged. Understand that we cannot possibly keep up with what is being suggested. Not even remotely close. More developers is also not a reasonable solution because it can lead to software problems and instability, inconsistencies and support difficulties for us and for the user. Our development team is growing, but only at a sustainable pace. Adding a new feature requires development of that feature, debugging that feature, documenting that feature, making improvements to that feature being requested (which is inevitable), and supporting that feature by answering the numerous questions about it which inevitably get asked every which way possible. It is an immense task. As Sierra Chart continues to grow and be enhanced, it becomes increasingly difficult for us to support. And it is for the reason above, is another reason, why is there a 0% chance, we are going to integrate to new data or Trading services suggested. It is the responsibility of those external services to adopt the DTC protocol: http://DTCprotocol.org Does it make sense, that we are the ones doing the integration to a proprietary protocol rather than the Data or Trading service integrating to a simple, well-organized, well-designed and open specification protocol? It only makes sense the external service is adopting the DTC protocol and this is what we insist on. When we are asked to integrate to a Data or Trading service and the Data or Trading service and the customer expects us to do the integration, at this point we will not undertake that programming effort any longer. So please do not ask as it is not well taken. We are happy to work with any Data or Trading service to encourage them to support the DTC Protocol. Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2017-03-26 03:30:20
|