Hi, > 'Fairly' accurate is not good enough.
I not done the stats on every release but you would have to agree it's happened many times. The fact we don't have only 1 or 2 RC for each release confirms it. I'd estimate that 80%+ of the releases have had more than 2 RCs I think "fairly accurate" covers that. > The point is, by painting with such broad strokes, you are discounting the > efforts of those who take time to contribute to the project. I'm not discounting anyones effort there and I really not know why you would assume or state that. We do have some issue here. For instance: - How many people have added new mustella tests? - How many new mustella tests have been added since incubation? - How many PMC members run the tests themselves on the RC? - How many committers run the mustella test before checking anything in? - How many committers/PMC members even know how to run the tests? - We have regular failures of the mustella test runs - often for no explained reasons - We need to rerun failed tests several times just to get all the tests to pass - that's hardly ideal - We've run into mustella tests that are wrong and just working by accident Yes the CI solves some of the later points and I totally agree having tests (of any sort) is better than not having them but it's fair to describe it as an imperfect solution. > But there is no point in blaming the CI system or the Mustella tests for > our difficult release process. It has caused issues in the past ie Michael + Nick collection changes. Thanks, Justin
