Hi Joerg, > We haven't identified the tests. The requirements was that they should > be "rock solid" and we have given those RESOURCE and MAIN FUNCTIONALITY > tests to customers and they were able to deal with them. > > It makes sense to use firstly less than these ~45 and have a look if we > "stop the bleeding" [means many regressions on every MWS] or not. If not > we should enhance the test coverage. As I have written it is a > step-by-step process.
Sorry, that's the wrong order. If we do not know whether those tests stop the bleeding, then we must not introduce them as mandatory process elements. It should be the other way round: We should have tests of which we know (or at least can be pretty sure) that they will stop (most/lot of) the bleeding. *Then* we can make them a mandatory part of the process. Ciao Frank -- - Frank Schönheit, Software Engineer [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - Sun Microsystems http://www.sun.com/staroffice - - OpenOffice.org Base http://dba.openoffice.org - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
