Re: Formal objection: Changing how the testing of potato works would invalidate the whole test. So please don't change it.
On Sun, May 14, 2000 at 10:30:11PM -0700, Jim Lynch wrote:
> Summary of this note: OK, you don't want to go back to an unfrozen state,
> you just want to cancel the current test cycle. I don't. It's not yet out
> of the prep phase. It will be when cd images for the test phase are
> officially available. Once they become available, they get released
> absolutely verbatum if it's decided to release after the first evaluation.
We (Jim, Michael Stone and several other developers observing and
occasionally saying something) have in the meantime discussed this issue at
length on IRC, so I'll just point out the important conclusions.
The current test cycle hasn't brought us much benefit, except that we have
learned from it how some things should _not_ be done :)
Since it began with about one hundred of RC bugs against packages that
wouldn't be removed, it was obvious boot-floppies and CD images were the
important things that should have been tested, and the rest of the
distribution would get thoroughly fixed and tested in another test cycle.
It is now obvious that the boot-floppies and CD images test has practically
failed due to the fact it's _way_ out of schedule. And in the meantime we
haven't fixed any of those RC bugs -- if anything was done (and at least 14
RC bugs were fixed, according to Jim's count of the RCB list comments), it
is stuck in Incoming until the test cycle ends.
So my opinion is that the test cycle should end now, and we should start
preparing for the next test cycle by fixing lots and lots[1] of RC bugs,
and finishing up internal testing of boot-floppies and CD images.
That way, we could actually start the next test cycle well prepared, so we
don't get behind schedule instantly, and also have a better distribution (as
in, packages without some of those RC bugs) to test.
Richard?
[1] It would be a good idea to organize another RCB fixing festival in that
time.
--
Digital Electronic Being Intended for Assassination and Nullification
Reply to: