Hi, > I'd like to come back to this and suggest a procedure: > > 1. Officially announce feature freeze. > 2. Address patches in bugzilla. we have 31 patches in bugzilla and we > should have each of them reviewed and hopefully a lot comitted. > 3. Address regressions. We have 47 (!!!) bugs marked as regressions in > bugzilla. We should go through each of them and check if its any > reasonable to fix them. > 4. Address bugs with high severity / high priority. (5 blockers, 9 > critical, 50 major... doh!) > 5. Do a "usability test". This means installing and doing the usual > stuff, a user would do and note all problems, annoyances. Currently ros > crashes very often with failed assertions and other stuff. If we ship > this in a release, people will be very disappointed. so we seriously > need to improve the situation. > 6. ??? > 7. profit > > Timo >
Are you suggesting devs should.... Work?! Regarding path review, I reviewed patch for bug #5880 with its author, it's incorrect. So, one less to review. Regarding regression, bug #5641 has been assigned to me, as my commit revealed the bug. BUT if the patch revealed the bug, it's not the patch itself which caused the bug. Function is correct (regarding test cases). So anyone is free to take that bug. Don't hesitate to bug "Caemyr" about it, IIRC, he looked at it. For the rest, dont' hesitate to assign me bugs/regression you think I may handle. I'll try to do my best about it. Can't promise more, sorry. So, now, lock trunk :D. And release! Regards, P. Schweitzer _______________________________________________ Ros-dev mailing list Ros-dev@reactos.org http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
