> How about an effort to get nightly builds of master available on as many > platforms as possible, and getting thousands of bored college students to > download, install, and test them?
I think that's still overly optimistic. There's a lot of moving parts here; you just can't just install a package and have it do something useful. You need to have a lot of surrounding infrastructure that involves real control of a fair amount of stuff that random college students won't have. 'make check' on a single machine will never give you useful testing results other than to find packaging or "smoke test" errors, which aren't all that helpful overall. > Wouldn't that massive crowsourced testing effort be worth the time of a > single developer to make sure *some* sort of package, even if it's half- > assed, gets distributed? I can't think of much of anything else that has a > bigger resource multiplation factor than a 'one click install', along with > some > defaults to use a 'test.openafs.org' cell. As others have commented, unskilled testing performed without a detailed test plan on software systems this complex is probably less helpful than might otherwise appear. GIGO applies here. A uncoordinated test process is unlikely to produce anything useful in that there have to be a sequence of coordinated tests, replacing one component at a time in a known order. I can't see how crowdsourcing would help here. _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
