Mark de Wever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> I do get the impression the rate of reported bugs is increasing
> and I expect quite some bugs to be discovered in 1.4.
> That being said; I do like to get and keep the bug count low but I think
> it will be hard.
I'm a little more optimistic, which is significant because I'm a
fairly close second after Mordante in count of fixes. Yes, we've had
a rash of new bugs lately, but I've noticed that the frequency of such
reports is in general very noisy and bursty. I don't see any reason
to fear this is a long-term trend.
Also, there has been a trend over the last couple of months for the
new bugs to be less about serious gameplay issues and more about
polish and details. While the bug count has not decreased to the less
than 30 that Mordante and I were shooting for, we have been trading
deep bugs for shallow ones. We presently have zero bugs in the
classes Blocker or Important, and following the recent demise of #4410
there are no longer any bugs that I see as indicators of serious
archicture problems. This is encouraging.
> The last weeks we ran into quite some 1.4-unfixable bugs, which
> increased the bug count again. I think it would be nice to have a bug
> stomping phase halfway towards 1.6 as well. That way we can still try to
> solve the harder to fix bugs and try to make 1.6 even better as 1.4. In
> this period we have a soft feature freeze, only features which do fix
> bugs are allowed.
I'm in favor of having a scheduled bug-stomping phase halfway before 1.6.
But I have a more radical proposal. I think our stable release interval
is too long. I think we need to shorten it to six months.
Argument for this will follow in a separate post, so please respond to that.
--
<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/";>Eric S. Raymond</a>
_______________________________________________
Wesnoth-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/wesnoth-dev
