Actually about to dive into a big search tweaking spike in a certain project here, happy to do it on 2.9.4. Got binaries?
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 12:27 PM, Troy Howard <thowar...@gmail.com> wrote: > We don't have any sort of QA report on the latest build. DIGY called > for testing, but I haven't seen anyone respond to that request > indicating successful testing. > > So, how do we want to manage this? > > In the business world, we'd never think of making a release without > extensive QA first. In my other open source projects, either we've > managed QA ourselves by 'switching hats' for a couple weeks prior to > release, or just crossed our fingers because the user base was too > small. > > Lucene.Net is a fairly high-profile project, with a large user base. I > think it would not be responsible to make a release without a formal > QA process. We do have extensive unit tests, but do you think those > are sufficient to cover our QA needs? Should we try to find community > members with a specialty in software testing that would be willing to > fulfill this role on our project? Should we just swap hats? > > I didn't worry about this issue with the latest 2.9.2 release because > it was QAed by the user base for a long time before it was an > 'official release'. Maybe this is an effective tactic? Release first, > and let the user base roll in bug reports fixing them on yet later > minor maintenance releases? This seems to be the method a lot of > projects use (i.e. no specific QA process, but rather an organic > process of 'try our best then deal with bug reports later'). > > What do we think about this? > > Thanks, > Troy > > > On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Prescott Nasser <geobmx...@hotmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Hey all, >> >> I know we have a number of outstanding JIRA issues, but I think most of them >> have been handled for the 2.9.4 release? Do we have anything outstanding >> that is holding back a new release? >> >> ~P >
