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

Re: Drop testing



On Sun, Oct 24, 2004 at 03:53:23PM +0400, Nikita V. Youshchenko wrote:
> > #include <hallo.h>
> Yes, there are problems with current scheme. So one should write down the
> facts and do a careful, in-detail, emotion-less analysis of each problem
> and it's reasons. 

Trivial analysis:

	* One of Testing's goals was to be 95% releasable at all times.
	* It hasn't been.
	* Why not?
	   (a) RC bugs
	   (b) Can't install it
	   (c) Security vulnerabilities
	* How can these be solved?
	   (a) (1) Pro-active removals by release managers,
	       (2) More bug fixing in unstable
	       (3) Bug fixing specifically for testing
	   (b) (1) Developing a maintainable installer
	   (c) (1) Doing security updates for testing
	       (2) Doing better security updates in unstable, 
	            and getting them into testing quickly

The release managers have been putting some effort into (a)(1) over the
past year, and there's four of them now instead of just one. How much effort
has the project been putting into the other factors?

> One such analysis is done and made public, most likely a
> solution will be found that is much less radical than killing everything,

Non-radical solutions don't let you write a general resolution, however.

> But such analysis should be done *after* *sarge* *release*. Flaming now will
> only postpone the release and do nothing more.

For comparison, testing was designed during a flamewar a month or two
before hamm's release. Well, extensive discussion is a far more accurate
description than flamewar -- in particular, I don't believe there was any
blame involved, whether on a person, process or tool. I may be mistaken.
Of course, there was pretty much nothing unconventional about our release
process at the time.

> Probably there are non-technical problems with the uncoming release. But
> there are technical problems also, yes? Why not eliminate those? If instead
> of each mail in this thread a single RC bug that affects sarge was fixed,
> probably there could be *zero* such bugs now.

Why not do both? Every time you post a mail to a thread like this, fix an
RC bug. This is the "ObBug:" rule.

ObBug: 275585

Cheers,
aj

-- 
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
Don't assume I speak for anyone but myself. GPG signed mail preferred.

``[S]exual orgies eliminate social tensions and ought to be encouraged.''
      -- US Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia (http://tinyurl.com/3kwod)

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: