[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

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. 
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel-announce/2001/debian-devel-announce-200102/msg00002.html
> ...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 [1].
> 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?

Hopefully none...

> Cheers,
> aj



       "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

Reply to: