17 Nov
2011
17 Nov
'11
12:36 a.m.
On Wednesday 16 November 2011 12:20:52 pm Darrell Anderson wrote:
In light of recent public criticisms about
Trinity's stability, do we have
a plan or do we allow for sufficient time for usability testing? The focus
seems to be about patching, packaging, and releases. Perhaps with the next
release we should introduce a fixed time for serious usability testing?
Proverbially, we all eat our own dog food before releasing the software?
If a wider window for testing means a shorter window for code hacking then
I vote for that. We don't adopt a testing window and code freeze as long as
a large project like Debian, :) but we should officially promote a wide
enough window to eat our own dog food. :)
We touched upon this topic yesterday but I want to bring the topic to the
table in a more "official" manner. :)
I'm a fan of the "when it works" release cycle. I don't think having a
specific release date is a good idea (though certainly taking a very long
time to release is bad too).
I think we should have a QA check list, something like:
-Solicit ideas for the next release
-Prioritize new features
--Which features are most important for next release?
-Solicit testing for:
--Usability
--Stability
--New features
-Paper cut bugs
That's just off the top of my head, I don't know that it's complete, but I
think it's a start.
--
Kristopher Gamrat
Ark Linux webmaster
http://www.arklinux.org/