Available at a wiki near you:
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Plan_of_Record-2008/Draft_3
The important changes since the last version include:
* simplified prose, care of Mitch
* a serious proposal for a stable release process for the next few months
* separation of release management thoughts
In my experience running QA teams and releases for commercial projects,
small fast releases require (or imply) quite a bit of focused process and
really good automation on the testing side.
Also, after other discussions on this list, it seems like there are two
other items that drive 'major
2008/4/18 Kim Quirk [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
In my experience running QA teams and releases for commercial projects,
small fast releases require (or imply) quite a bit of focused process and
really good automation on the testing side.
Excellent ideas, both, in any case.
Also, after other
On Fri, 18 Apr 2008, Kim Quirk wrote:
In my experience running QA teams and releases for commercial projects,
small fast releases require (or imply) quite a bit of focused process and
really good automation on the testing side.
Also, after other discussions on this list, it seems like there
Available at a wiki near you:
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Plan_of_Record-2008/Draft_2
The important changes since the last version are:
* a new foreword, with a rich analogy describing our present situation,
* a new (tentative) commentary/criticism of our release process to
date,
* a
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Michael Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Available at a wiki near you:
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Plan_of_Record-2008/Draft_2
Making quick progresses, yay!
A couple of thoughts about the release process:
* Reducing the scope of the releases is a reasonable
Peanut gallery comments...
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:02:02PM +0200, Marco Pesenti Gritti wrote:
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Michael Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Available at a wiki near you:
http://wiki.laptop.org/go/Plan_of_Record-2008/Draft_2
Making quick progresses, yay!
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Marco Pesenti Gritti
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Smaller-and-faster (focused) releases are an interesting idea but I
think they are also quite a challenge. We need to ensure that we are
able to parallelize the various streams. For example, if we do a
On Thu, Apr 17, 2008 at 1:23 PM, Tomeu Vizoso [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see this too as a hard problem and don't really have experience
neither. What I would expect is that working on frequent time-based
releases with features slipping as needed works best for projects like
linux distros,
