I think the biggest problem with testing is that only a few users actually test the daily/RC builds. Having a longer testing period would help here, but I doubt it would make a dramatic difference. Most bugs are found after release. Don't think you can do anything about that.
Am Montag, den 29.07.2013, 14:28 +0200 schrieb Thomas Dinges: > Hi, > We should communicate the Buildbot resource better (too many people > still use graphicall with experimental patches blah for testing). > But if we are really strict with terms, then we are only in beta, > starting with BCon3. I would consider BCon 1 and 2 as Alpha (many new > features, lots of code cleanup..) > > Suggestion: > At the beginning of BCon3 (major features are in, we work on final > touches and fixes) we take the buildbot resource and communicate that on > blender.org, blendernation etc, and ask the community to test the builds. > I don't think we need to provide special builds for a beta test, as long > as people report bugs with our official builds, all is fine > > Then at the beginning/middle of BCon4, we do an RC, and then only fix > regressions, then release. > > Best regards, > Thomas > > Am 29.07.2013 14:06, schrieb Bastien Montagne: > > I would consider daily bot-built blender’s as “Beta”… After all, we > > never (intentionally) break /trunk, so those builds should always be > > usable, even though not strictly tested. Isn’t it the definition of > > “beta” release? > > > > Bastien > _______________________________________________ Bf-committers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.blender.org/mailman/listinfo/bf-committers
