On 06/20/2010 01:45 PM, [email protected] wrote: > > Hi, another week and Sunday gone, but this time i tried to look a bit > closely to the numbers... > > 340 regressions <-- release announcement > 356 regressions <-- release announcement + 1week > 339 regressions <-- release announcement + 2weeks(rc1) > 322 regressions <-- release announcement + 3weeks(rc2) > 325 regressions <-- release announcement + 4weeks > 326 regressions <-- release announcement + 5weeks(rc3) > 325 regressions <-- release announcement + 6weeks(rc4) > > > 3rd week in a row and unfortunately these numbers don't change significantly > to zero. Based on these following numbers we can't even say, that we > close at the same rate as new are opened. Closer look to "fixing" capacity > or in other words what is behind -1 fixed regression for this week: > > +24 Newly marked, opened (new/unconfirmed) > -16 Closed, resolved fixed > -09 Not a regression (invalid, duplicate) > ==== > -1 > > More IN than OUT could show that stable release is far a way. >
I'll note that you'll see a very similar measure when just looking at Wine bugs in general. We are, nevertheless, making progress ;) Still, I do support delaying the release until it feels like there's a substantial drop in non-deferred patches. That's the sign that tells us we've run out of easy enough release bugs/regressions to fix and may as well release. Thanks, Scott Ritchie
