The issue of balkanizing the release components was brought up in a nilobject.com post (well in a comment anyway).
Fortunately Jonathan has started writing again... Good stuff! ~joe On 10/31/06 1:19 AM, "Ronald Vogelaar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > IMO RS should reorganize their company and start to make use of a QA > department (Quality Assurance). No product that has not been thoroughly > tested and okay'ed by QA gets released. > Of course once you're commited to a quarterly release plan like they have, > you're effectively shutting out any possibility of effective quality > control, and it should be listed relatively high on the list of "100 ways to > screw yourself and your customers". > At the time I did voice my concern, and I'd much rather sit here having been > proven wrong. > > Ronald Vogelaar > http://www.rovosoft.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Daniel Stenning" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: RB Release Cycle Stability issues - A suggestion:- > > >> To help those developers whose applications often break on recompilation >> with a new release I have a suggestion for RS: > > _______________________________________________ > Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: > <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> > > Search the archives of this list here: > <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html> _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives of this list here: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html>
