Forums | developer.brewmp.com Forums | developer.brewmp.com

Developer

Forums

We're having quite a bit of trouble with submissions to NSTL at the moment. Was wondering if other people are experiencing anything similar. After their "upgrade," it seems everything has gone down the tubes.

*We used to submit one class id and add on additional handsets where only the resource files changes (and perhaps the mod file, if we fixed bugs along the way). Now it appears if we want to port to new handsets, we have to generate a new class id, even though the app is essentially the same.

*We keep encountering server error ever server error. Submitting in the "old days" was a hassle. Now it's a nightmare.

*To their credit, NSTL's e-mail responses have been quick, if spartan. But we can't get details. I've read through the newly updated submission guide, but it would help to understand the difference between the old and new system (I don't think I ever fully understood the old system for that matter).

*To top it off, we were in the middle of our normal submission process when NSTL did their upgrade. Now it seems we have to start all over with NSTL, at additional cost.

Anyone else having similar issues? Perhaps there's documentation I haven't read yet?

We too are having problems submitting. Are you still having problems?

We too are having problems submitting. Are you still having problems?

They seem to be fixing the site one step at a time. For ever problem we submit to the NSTL support e-mail, we manage to move forward in our submission process after they say they have fixed it. It would be nice if they fixed everything ahead of time, so we don't have to troubleshoot their website. We even got so far as to have NSTL point the problem to a data access problem with Qualcomm.
We think we're almost there. How strange is it that a software testing lab failed to test their own website interface?

They seem to be fixing the site one step at a time. For ever problem we submit to the NSTL support e-mail, we manage to move forward in our submission process after they say they have fixed it. It would be nice if they fixed everything ahead of time, so we don't have to troubleshoot their website. We even got so far as to have NSTL point the problem to a data access problem with Qualcomm.
We think we're almost there. How strange is it that a software testing lab failed to test their own website interface?

We've experienced numerous problems since the NSTL website went back up. We've has great difficulty getting our BREW submissions through the system.
Right now, we are seeing problems with features like "Upgrade Platform". It does not show us previously passed builds that we'd like to extend to new handsets.
We've seen "Error: 600" and "Error: 10" upon new application submission as well.
What problems are you experiencing?
ripwolfe wrote:They seem to be fixing the site one step at a time. For ever problem we submit to the NSTL support e-mail, we manage to move forward in our submission process after they say they have fixed it. It would be nice if they fixed everything ahead of time, so we don't have to troubleshoot their website. We even got so far as to have NSTL point the problem to a data access problem with Qualcomm.
We think we're almost there. How strange is it that a software testing lab failed to test their own website interface?

We've experienced numerous problems since the NSTL website went back up. We've has great difficulty getting our BREW submissions through the system.
Right now, we are seeing problems with features like "Upgrade Platform". It does not show us previously passed builds that we'd like to extend to new handsets.
We've seen "Error: 600" and "Error: 10" upon new application submission as well.
What problems are you experiencing?
ripwolfe wrote:They seem to be fixing the site one step at a time. For ever problem we submit to the NSTL support e-mail, we manage to move forward in our submission process after they say they have fixed it. It would be nice if they fixed everything ahead of time, so we don't have to troubleshoot their website. We even got so far as to have NSTL point the problem to a data access problem with Qualcomm.
We think we're almost there. How strange is it that a software testing lab failed to test their own website interface?

We're also having NSTL submission issues. Please check out our other thread and post something if you know...
http://brewforums.qualcomm.com/showthread.php?t=15631

We're also having NSTL submission issues. Please check out our other thread and post something if you know...
http://brewforums.qualcomm.com/showthread.php?t=15631

Same here...
With the old system, whenever I had a new build for a new handset I used to “Add Platform”. Now, if I do the same, the system does not ask for the build files. Do I have to select “Upgrading Existing Item”? Or where do I submit the build? Do I submit as “New Application” and then ask NSTL for a price adjustment?
I was ready to submit a new platform for an old game (asuming it was done with “Upgrading”) and at the end it showed a cost of $700 when before was $250 for a full test. On one of the faqs there is a note for partial test: Note that this Partial Test fee does not apply to pre-commercial platforms. Developer MUST call NSTL support to adjust from a Full Test to a Partial Test and request a refund from $700 to $250. Do I need to contact NSTL every time I add a new build???
And on Qualcomm site everything was automated, now I have to create part numbers and add the carriers to that particular part number. What's the advantage in that?

Same here...
With the old system, whenever I had a new build for a new handset I used to “Add Platform”. Now, if I do the same, the system does not ask for the build files. Do I have to select “Upgrading Existing Item”? Or where do I submit the build? Do I submit as “New Application” and then ask NSTL for a price adjustment?
I was ready to submit a new platform for an old game (asuming it was done with “Upgrading”) and at the end it showed a cost of $700 when before was $250 for a full test. On one of the faqs there is a note for partial test: Note that this Partial Test fee does not apply to pre-commercial platforms. Developer MUST call NSTL support to adjust from a Full Test to a Partial Test and request a refund from $700 to $250. Do I need to contact NSTL every time I add a new build???
And on Qualcomm site everything was automated, now I have to create part numbers and add the carriers to that particular part number. What's the advantage in that?

Yes, this matches our expereince with the new system. Now, apparently one must use "Upgrade" to add new platforms to an existing application even when only making minor changes to the binary or version number. These new definitions and procedures were a complete surprise to us! We received no advanced warning about the new costs or procedural definitions.
We've also run into a bug in which some of our applications are not shown as available for "Upgrade". In an attempt to work around this system failure, we were forced to create a new Class ID and submit as a new application. But those "New Application" submissions also failed for us with Qualcomm internal errors!
We are still waiting for problem resolutions from Qualcomm and NSTL...
hudson wrote:Same here...
With the old system, whenever I had a new build for a new handset I used to “Add Platform”. Now, if I do the same, the system does not ask for the build files. Do I have to select “Upgrading Existing Item”? Or where do I submit the build? Do I submit as “New Application” and then ask NSTL for a price adjustment?
I was ready to submit a new platform for an old game (asuming it was done with “Upgrading”) and at the end it showed a cost of $700 when before was $250 for a full test. On one of the faqs there is a note for partial test: Note that this Partial Test fee does not apply to pre-commercial platforms. Developer MUST call NSTL support to adjust from a Full Test to a Partial Test and request a refund from $700 to $250. Do I need to contact NSTL every time I add a new build???
And on Qualcomm site everything was automated, now I have to create part numbers and add the carriers to that particular part number. What's the advantage in that?

Yes, this matches our expereince with the new system. Now, apparently one must use "Upgrade" to add new platforms to an existing application even when only making minor changes to the binary or version number. These new definitions and procedures were a complete surprise to us! We received no advanced warning about the new costs or procedural definitions.
We've also run into a bug in which some of our applications are not shown as available for "Upgrade". In an attempt to work around this system failure, we were forced to create a new Class ID and submit as a new application. But those "New Application" submissions also failed for us with Qualcomm internal errors!
We are still waiting for problem resolutions from Qualcomm and NSTL...
hudson wrote:Same here...
With the old system, whenever I had a new build for a new handset I used to “Add Platform”. Now, if I do the same, the system does not ask for the build files. Do I have to select “Upgrading Existing Item”? Or where do I submit the build? Do I submit as “New Application” and then ask NSTL for a price adjustment?
I was ready to submit a new platform for an old game (asuming it was done with “Upgrading”) and at the end it showed a cost of $700 when before was $250 for a full test. On one of the faqs there is a note for partial test: Note that this Partial Test fee does not apply to pre-commercial platforms. Developer MUST call NSTL support to adjust from a Full Test to a Partial Test and request a refund from $700 to $250. Do I need to contact NSTL every time I add a new build???
And on Qualcomm site everything was automated, now I have to create part numbers and add the carriers to that particular part number. What's the advantage in that?

Applications will only show under upgrade if all the handsets in that version have passed. If there are any failures or withdrawals then the app will show under resubmission, and if it hasn't been tested yet then it won't show in either.
I can only speculate on the price change but we were submitting in the same fashion as the rest of you. However in NSTL's documentation (for the old process) they stated every time the MOD, or binary changes then you need to submit the app as a new submission (which in the old system) would be an extra $1000. So they probably know how people were getting around their system before so they changed the price model. Now when submitting an upgrade or resubmission it's $700 for the first PID, and then $250 for each additional PID unless it's grandfathered. You also don't have to select the grandfathered PIDs. They will automatically be added after submission if you select only the parent. Maybe some of you already knew that but I've been on the phone with NSTL and Qualcomm non-stop since this change (but haven't gotten very far) and am willing to share any knowledge that I can because this "upgrade" is ridiculous!
If any of you know anything about the "Error 802" error please take a look at our post here http://brewforums.qualcomm.com/showthread.php?t=15631. NSTL has stated that all files outside of the BAR must have extensions but I know this wasn't being enforced before. Do any of you have documentation that speaks of this?

Applications will only show under upgrade if all the handsets in that version have passed. If there are any failures or withdrawals then the app will show under resubmission, and if it hasn't been tested yet then it won't show in either.
I can only speculate on the price change but we were submitting in the same fashion as the rest of you. However in NSTL's documentation (for the old process) they stated every time the MOD, or binary changes then you need to submit the app as a new submission (which in the old system) would be an extra $1000. So they probably know how people were getting around their system before so they changed the price model. Now when submitting an upgrade or resubmission it's $700 for the first PID, and then $250 for each additional PID unless it's grandfathered. You also don't have to select the grandfathered PIDs. They will automatically be added after submission if you select only the parent. Maybe some of you already knew that but I've been on the phone with NSTL and Qualcomm non-stop since this change (but haven't gotten very far) and am willing to share any knowledge that I can because this "upgrade" is ridiculous!
If any of you know anything about the "Error 802" error please take a look at our post here http://brewforums.qualcomm.com/showthread.php?t=15631. NSTL has stated that all files outside of the BAR must have extensions but I know this wasn't being enforced before. Do any of you have documentation that speaks of this?

Also it seems that we keep getting the "error 10" error in the last stage of submitting builds. It happens maybe 3-4 out of 5 times. Everything is correct and I've double checked everything but NSTL says that the 10 error is their miscellaneous/general error code so it could mean anything. Are any of you receiving the 10 error at least 3 out of 5 times? And if so, do you know what has been causing it? I have a ticket in with NSTL and Qualcomm but I'd rather not wait on them...

Also it seems that we keep getting the "error 10" error in the last stage of submitting builds. It happens maybe 3-4 out of 5 times. Everything is correct and I've double checked everything but NSTL says that the 10 error is their miscellaneous/general error code so it could mean anything. Are any of you receiving the 10 error at least 3 out of 5 times? And if so, do you know what has been causing it? I have a ticket in with NSTL and Qualcomm but I'd rather not wait on them...

We have also seen this. We get: "Error: 10 Message: General Error: General Error. Resource: com.qualcomm.qis.exception.ExceptionResource" whenever we try to submit a new application.

We have also seen this. We get: "Error: 10 Message: General Error: General Error. Resource: com.qualcomm.qis.exception.ExceptionResource" whenever we try to submit a new application.

Yeah I just got off the phone again with NSTL and they said that the Qualcomm received the same error when logging in with our account. What seems to make the submission go through better is splitting the submission out more, but it'll cost more as well. Some of our submissions are suppose to hit 15 handsets but won't go through because of the error, but if we split it into 3 different submissions of 5 handsets it seems to go through ok. Since NSTL and Qualcomm have admitted it's a problem we'll just ask for an adjustment, but I wouldn't try this if NSTL/Qualcomm hasn't admitted there is a problem on their end...

Yeah I just got off the phone again with NSTL and they said that the Qualcomm received the same error when logging in with our account. What seems to make the submission go through better is splitting the submission out more, but it'll cost more as well. Some of our submissions are suppose to hit 15 handsets but won't go through because of the error, but if we split it into 3 different submissions of 5 handsets it seems to go through ok. Since NSTL and Qualcomm have admitted it's a problem we'll just ask for an adjustment, but I wouldn't try this if NSTL/Qualcomm hasn't admitted there is a problem on their end...

Yes, it seems that picking several handsets (PIDS) for a submission excites the dreaded "Error 10" problem. The only successful submissions we've had since the upgrade were for builds submitted as new applications that targeted just 1 or 2 PIDS. Anything else yields "Error 10".

Yes, it seems that picking several handsets (PIDS) for a submission excites the dreaded "Error 10" problem. The only successful submissions we've had since the upgrade were for builds submitted as new applications that targeted just 1 or 2 PIDS. Anything else yields "Error 10".