17 Nov
2011
17 Nov
'11
12:20 a.m.
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. :)
Darrell
17 Nov
17 Nov
12:36 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Quality Assurance
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/
1:48 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Quality Assurance
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Kristopher John Gamrat <
chaotickjg(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Wednesday 16 November 2011 12:20:52 pm Darrell Anderson wrote:
As I discussed with Timothy close to the release date, doing more QA for
the next release seems necessary since there are quite a few bugs not
present on the last KDE release but present on Trinity. I'm available to
help testing and bug reporting, hopefully also for bug fixing.
Best regards,
Tiago
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/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail:
trinity-devel-unsubscribe(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
For additional commands, e-mail:
trinity-devel-help(a)lists.pearsoncomputing.net
Read list messsages on the Web archive:
http://trinity-devel.pearsoncomputing.net/
Please remember not to top-post:
http://trinity.pearsoncomputing.net/mailing_lists/#top-posting
2:22 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Quality Assurance
As I discussed with Timothy close to the release date,
doing more QA for
the next release seems necessary since there are quite a few bugs not
present on the last KDE release but present on Trinity. I'm available to
help testing and bug reporting, hopefully also for bug fixing.
Best regards,
Tiago
On this topic I would like to announce that R14.0 will be a bugfix release
only. No large new features within the core system will be accepted.
However, there are a couple of applications that we should include in
R14.0. kvpnc springs to mind due to NetworkManager's recent API change
and tendency to fail even with the Gnome nm-applet, and there are more
requests for useful applications on the bugtracker.
Tim
3:59 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Quality Assurance
On 16 November 2011 14:22, Timothy Pearson <kb9vqf(a)pearsoncomputing.net>wrote;wrote:
What o
As I discussed
with Timothy close to the release date, doing more QA for
the next release seems necessary since there are quite a few bugs not
present on the last KDE release but present on Trinity. I'm available to
help testing and bug reporting, hopefully also for bug fixing.
Best regards,
Tiago
On this topic I would like to announce that R14.0 will be a bugfix release
only. No large new features within the core system will be accepted.
However, there are a couple of applications that we should include in
R14.0. kvpnc springs to mind due to NetworkManager's recent API change
and tendency to fail even with the Gnome nm-applet, and there are more
requests for useful applications on the bugtracker.
Tim
4:02 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Quality Assurance
On 16 November 2011 15:59, Calvin Morrison <mutantturkey(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 16 November 2011 14:22, Timothy Pearson <kb9vqf(a)pearsoncomputing.net>wrote;wrote:
What o
Seems my message was truncated.
What of samelians recent progress regarding UPower, and the HAL
replacement?
Calvin Morrison
As I
discussed with Timothy close to the release date, doing more QA for
the next release seems necessary since there are quite a few bugs not
present on the last KDE release but present on Trinity. I'm available to
help testing and bug reporting, hopefully also for bug fixing.
Best regards,
Tiago
On this topic I would like to announce that R14.0 will be a bugfix release
only. No large new features within the core system will be accepted.
However, there are a couple of applications that we should include in
R14.0. kvpnc springs to mind due to NetworkManager's recent API change
and tendency to fail even with the Gnome nm-applet, and there are more
requests for useful applications on the bugtracker.
Tim
4:09 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Quality Assurance
On 16 November 2011 15:59, Calvin Morrison
<mutantturkey(a)gmail.com> wrote:
I was unaware of this progress. Link please? :-)
We have to be careful. If HAL is replaced the QA period will be quite
long, probably many months, just to make sure that it works 100% in all
circumstances. My gut instinct is to wait for R15.0, but I need to see
what Serghei has done first.
Tim
On 16 November 2011 14:22, Timothy Pearson
<kb9vqf(a)pearsoncomputing.net>wrote;wrote:
What o
Seems my message was truncated.
What of samelians recent progress regarding UPower, and the HAL
replacement?
Calvin Morrison
As I
discussed with Timothy close to the release date, doing more QA
for
the next release seems necessary since there are
quite a few bugs not
present on the last KDE release but present on Trinity. I'm available
to
help testing and bug reporting, hopefully also
for bug fixing.
Best regards,
Tiago
On this topic I would like to announce that R14.0 will be a bugfix
release
only. No large new features within the core system will be accepted.
However, there are a couple of applications that we should include in
R14.0. kvpnc springs to mind due to NetworkManager's recent API change
and tendency to fail even with the Gnome nm-applet, and there are more
requests for useful applications on the bugtracker.
Tim
4:11 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Quality Assurance
On 16 November 2011 16:09, Timothy Pearson <kb9vqf(a)pearsoncomputing.net>wrote;wrote:
I was unaware of this progress. Link please? :-)
We have to be careful. If HAL is replaced the QA period will be quite
long, probably many months, just to make sure that it works 100% in all
circumstances. My gut instinct is to wait for R15.0, but I need to see
what Serghei has done first.
Tim
Do you intend this release to be shorter than 6 months?
Calvin Morrison
On 16 November
2011 15:59, Calvin Morrison <mutantturkey(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
On 16 November 2011 14:22, Timothy Pearson
<kb9vqf(a)pearsoncomputing.net>wrote;wrote:
Seems my message was truncated.
What of samelians recent progress regarding UPower, and the HAL
replacement?
Calvin Morrison
> As I discussed with Timothy close to the
release date, doing more QA
for
> the next release seems necessary since there are quite a few bugs not
> present on the last KDE release but present on Trinity. I'm available
to
> help testing and bug reporting, hopefully also for bug fixing.
>
> Best regards,
> Tiago
On this topic I would like to announce that R14.0 will be a bugfix
release
only. No large new features within the core system will be accepted.
However, there are a couple of applications that we should include in
R14.0. kvpnc springs to mind due to NetworkManager's recent API change
and tendency to fail even with the Gnome nm-applet, and there are more
requests for useful applications on the bugtracker.
Tim
What o
4:14 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Quality Assurance
On 16 November 2011 16:09, Timothy Pearson
<kb9vqf(a)pearsoncomputing.net>wrote;wrote:
I was unaware of this progress. Link please? :-)
We have to be careful. If HAL is replaced the QA period will be quite
long, probably many months, just to make sure that it works 100% in all
circumstances. My gut instinct is to wait for R15.0, but I need to see
what Serghei has done first.
Tim
Do you intend this release to be shorter than 6 months?
No. I intend to have a lot of the bugs fixed; at this point there are
well over a hundred bugs open. This will take time to rectify.
Also, I am not allowing another release to be shoved out the door like
3.5.13 was. I am allocating ample QA time so as not to ship another buggy
release.
Tim
On 16
November 2011 15:59, Calvin Morrison <mutantturkey(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
>
>
> On 16 November 2011 14:22, Timothy Pearson
> <kb9vqf(a)pearsoncomputing.net>wrote;wrote:
>
>> > As I discussed with Timothy close to the release date, doing more
QA
>> for
>> > the next release seems necessary since there are quite a few bugs
not
>> > present on the last KDE release but
present on Trinity. I'm
available
>> to
>> > help testing and bug reporting, hopefully also for bug fixing.
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> > Tiago
>>
>> On this topic I would like to announce that R14.0 will be a bugfix
>> release
>> only. No large new features within the core system will be
accepted.
>>
>> However, there are a couple of applications that we should include
in
>> R14.0. kvpnc springs to mind due to
NetworkManager's recent API
change
>> and tendency to fail even with the Gnome
nm-applet, and there are
more
>
requests for useful applications on the bugtracker.
>
> Tim
>
>
>
What o
Seems my message was truncated.
What of samelians recent progress regarding UPower, and the HAL
replacement?
Calvin Morrison
4:28 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Quality Assurance
On Wednesday 16 November 2011 23:09:20 Timothy Pearson wrote:
[...]
Hehe, I wanted to do a surprise :)
This is what I did so far: www.thel.ro/upower.tar.gz
This is an abstract layer to upower interface. When will be finished, I will
start to develop a replacement for kpowersave based on this layer. I intent
to make it as a module for kcontrol (as Power Management or smth like this).
However, this will drop HAL partially, we will need to develop more
abstraction layers (udisk, networkmanager, etc).
--
Serghei
What of
samelians recent progress regarding UPower, and the HAL
replacement?
Calvin Morrison
I was unaware of this progress. Link please? :-)
4:34 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Quality Assurance
On Wednesday 16 November 2011 23:28:03 Serghei Amelian wrote:
On Wednesday 16 November 2011 23:09:20 Timothy Pearson
wrote:
[...]
Hehe, I wanted to do a surprise :)
This is what I did so far: www.thel.ro/upower.tar.gz
Also, I think my work is a good example for keeping binary backward
compatibility, using extensively d-pointers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opaque_pointer
--
Serghei
What of
samelians recent progress regarding UPower, and the HAL
replacement?
Calvin Morrison
I was unaware of this progress. Link please? :-)
4:40 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Quality Assurance
On Wednesday 16 November 2011 23:09:20 Timothy Pearson
wrote:
[...]
Hehe, I wanted to do a surprise :)
This is what I did so far: www.thel.ro/upower.tar.gz
This is an abstract layer to upower interface. When will be finished, I
will
start to develop a replacement for kpowersave based on this layer. I
intent
to make it as a module for kcontrol (as Power Management or smth like
this).
However, this will drop HAL partially, we will need to develop more
abstraction layers (udisk, networkmanager, etc).
Wow! I wasn't expecting that--nice work!
Are you following the proposed API on the Wiki? I only ask because the
class names look familiar.
We can always add the new library to R14.0; the only QA-conditional
application would be the kpowersave replacement. I'll wait for you to
finish that portion and then take a look at it.
Keep up the good work!
Tim
What of
samelians recent progress regarding UPower, and the HAL
replacement?
Calvin Morrison
I was unaware of this progress. Link please? :-)
4:54 a.m.
New subject: [trinity-devel] Quality Assurance
On Wednesday 16 November 2011 23:40:49 Timothy Pearson wrote:
Hehe, thanks.
On Wednesday
16 November 2011 23:09:20 Timothy Pearson wrote:
[...]
Hehe, I wanted to do a surprise :)
This is what I did so far: www.thel.ro/upower.tar.gz
This is an abstract layer to upower interface. When will be finished, I
will
start to develop a replacement for kpowersave based on this layer. I
intent
to make it as a module for kcontrol (as Power Management or smth like
this).
However, this will drop HAL partially, we will need to develop more
abstraction layers (udisk, networkmanager, etc).
Wow! I wasn't expecting that--nice work! What of
samelians recent progress regarding UPower, and the HAL
replacement?
Calvin Morrison
I was unaware of this progress. Link please? :-) Are you following the proposed API on the Wiki?
Not exactly, I choose to follow DBus UPower specifications very closely.
I only ask because the class names look familiar.
We talk about it few months ago and I followed some of ideas (namespacing,
templates for replies from DBus, etc). However, these are low level clases
(mostly for speaking with DBus), we can use it to create more abstractized
layers, if is needed.
We can always add the new library to R14.0; the only
QA-conditional
application would be the kpowersave replacement. I'll wait for you to
finish that portion and then take a look at it.
No problem, for first release we can provide it as an extra-application (but
I'm pretty sure that will work as expected).
--
Serghei
4825
days inactive
4825
days old
12 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
Calvin Morrison -
Darrell Anderson -
Kristopher John Gamrat -
Serghei Amelian -
Tiago Marques -
Timothy Pearson