"Vivian Meazza" wrote:
> I only mention this because it indicates that the quality of our testing
> might not be quite as good as it should be as we move rapidly towards 1.0
<RANT>We know exactly this phenomenon for several years now and to my
observation very little changed in the meantime. The biggest success
was to install a consensus that the pre-release phase should last at
least two weeks. To my opinon two _months_ would be appropriate for
such a complex piece of software that runs on so many different
platforms and is maintained by such a small developer base.
Unfortunately I didn't manage to crowd a significant number of
supporters for this idea.</RANT>
Actually there were times when I got on everyones nerves by
continuously pointing at bugs or inconsistencies that I was unable to
fix myself. Finally I realized that only reporting or documenting bugs
(whereas the latter is a _really_ time-consuming task !!) without
providing a fix was not that much welcome and I decided to engage with
my own sub-projects that I am capable of running without external help.
Regards,
Martin.
--
Unix _IS_ user friendly - it's just selective about who its friends are !
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
Flightgear-devel mailing list
Flightgear-devel@flightgear.org
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
2f585eeea02e2c79d7b1d8c4963bae2d
