Hi All, > Entwine doesn't wan to own the QA process, but we are certainly willing to > lead the way to getting to a stage where there is a dfined process in > place that has been proven to work.
Sounds good to me. As always when we talk about to A the Q of Matterhorn, I'm on board. I hadn't dare myselfe to get this weel rolling but I would like to help pushing it. Sould we found a workgroup? > Total agreement here as well. We are not looking to own anything here > (especially given that QA is something that usually nobody wants to be > owning). It just seems that at the current state, the project needs more > defintion around QA, while there is hesitation to invest into it. People > still prefer to invest into "features", mostly because this is much easier > to sell to your donors (and more fun). Totaly agree too. Most institutions regonize in the long run that stabilty, robustness and reliability are more important to deliver a stable service for the students. Regrads from Wolfsburg Nils _______________________________________________ Matterhorn-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn-users
