UPDATE FROM MABULA
I have had a very rough 2 months unfortunately health wise. I was struck 3x in a row with bacterial infections. The second infection occurred  after a routine hospital checkup and I became very sick. I had to rest and take a lot of antibiotics. Once I was recovering and restarting work 1 month ago, I again became sick. The infection was not yet gone, so even more antibiotics and rest was needed. Needless to say, it took a lot of my energy and I needed a lot of rest.
Finally, the infection is really gone and my energy is coming back step-by-step now and I have started work again. I am terribly sorry to have kept you waiting for support. I will address all outstanding questions and e-mails step-by step and will be on the forum daily from today.
APP 2.0.0-beta47 will come soon as well, a lot of work was already completed before I became very ill, so the release is also nearly ready for you. Beta47 will be much faster actually. Many workflows will be more than 2x faster, mosaics can even be 10x faster than before because registration really received a major boost... all compared to beta46. Â Before I release it, I will make sure that everything is working properly and then I will release it.
Yesterday, my stack had very bright satellite/aircraft streaks. I hadn't selected any outlier rejection, so I wasn't concerned. I went back and read the verbiage where it suggested that "Adaptive" combined the best of the other rejection programs, Windsor and Sigma. Â
I selected it and re-stacked. Well, the result was for sure an improvement, but not an adequate improvement as the streaks were still very visible. I thought I would have to find a way to examine each frame and hand delete the bad ones. This is probably a good idea.
Instead, just to see, I re-stacked again using Sigma. Sigma worked completely. So, there appeared to be some warning, do these rejection programs bite my signal data? Is it in fact a better idea so tediously sift the light frames "by hand"?
Depends on the data really, if it's reaaaallly bad it might be better to leave out some of those frames. But it requires some experimentation if the automatic settings don't work well, you can lower the value for the kappa-high to get a more aggressive rejection. Look carefully if it eats away wanted data (usually stars) and go to the setting that is just right. Use a few frames to test (like 20) if you want to get a good idea for a larger dataset. If that still doesn't work well, you'd really have to get that data out indeed.
