On Thursday 20 April 2006 16:10, Boyd Lynn Gerber wrote:
> > I can't help noticing a bit of a problem. With a very aggressive
> > release-schedule such as "every 2 weeks", chances of genuine bugs being
> >
> > 1) reported,
> > 2) diagnosed and
> > 3) fixed
> >
> > in that timeframe are very minimal.
>
> This is my greatest fear.
>
> > When I say "genuine" I discount typos, apparmor bureacrazy, and other
> > minors that can be dealt with by level 1 support.
> > I've got a couple of open reports (159731, 136742, 159727, 153585), and
> > whilst an aggressive release-schedule is probably a Good Thing(R), it
> > puts a lot of unnecessary strain on testers. For bugs/problems that
> > aren't positively fixed before the next release, it's usually "please
> > install <next release> and see if problem has gone away".
> >
> > Perhaps I'm just whining or venting some steam, but the aggressive
> > release-schedule isn't doing me much good.
>
> I too am very concerned about this and agree 1000%. I wonder the same
> thing. I do not want to complain but I have real concerns.
>
I think they are trying to implement XP, you know shorter cycle, more release
and also more feedback from the customer (us). And iirc my XP book, if you
find some major problem you adapt the schedule ... and I believe they are doing
this too
so for me it's not a concern, just another way of producing high quality
software products.
Mathieu
--
Hollywood is where if you don't have happiness you send out for it.
-- Rex Reed
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
