Re: testing and no release schedule
On Fri, Apr 02, 2004 at 10:09:02PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > > we thought a hundred RC bugs was almost impossible to manage; and weren't
> > > even trying to ensure absolutely everything had its dependencies met,
> > > let alone its build-dependencies.
> > AFAIR, in potato on i386 all dependencies were met,
> AFAICS you recall incorrectly.
> ...indicates there were 8 i386 packages in potato when it was stable that
> were uninstallable (which only considers dependencies, not recommendations
> nor priorities); and 442 packages all up. That compares to woody at the
> moment, with 16 such packages on i386, and 225 in total across the same
> architectures. There were approximately twice as many packages in total
> on each of those architectures (my scripts haven't been generating stats
> for the other architectures) in woody compared to potato.
Sorry, I stand corrected.
I forgot that the usual pcmcia-modules mess was already present in
> > In big commercial project, you typically denote a forth or even half of
> > the development time for testing .
> We do testing concurrently with development. How many developers aren't
> running testing or unstable systems full time?
Testing during development is definitely not a bad thing.
But it's not a complete replacement for a thorough testing of the whole
> How many users are running
> testing or unstable systems in mission critical roles?
"Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
"Only a promise," Lao Er said.
Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed