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

Testing and honesty

Hash: SHA1

Art Edwards wrote:
> Unless such core pieces as the debugging tool (ddd) and the data
display tool
> (xmgrace) are working, it is dishonest to pretend that the 64-bit version
> is ready for testing.
It seems your expectations for our "testing" distribution do not match
what we have already stated clearly on our website.  Please read this:


"Packages are installed into the `testing' directory after they have
undergone some degree of testing in unstable

They must be in sync on all architectures where they have been built
and mustn't have dependencies that make them uninstallable; they also
have to have fewer release-critical bugs than the versions currently
in testing. This way, we hope that `testing' is always close to being
a release candidate."

In particular, no guarantees are made that the entire distribution
will be 100% release-critical bug-free.  All we can assure you is that
packages have undergone "some degree of testing" and have fewer
release-critical bugs than the versions currently in testing.  The way
in which the whole system is kept "honest" is by users filing bug
reports, which in turn keeps the RC bug count in testing down to as
few as possible given the resources available to our project.

For a more detailed description of this process, see:


Now, I understand your frustration and disappointment, but I think
before using testing, you should have made it your business to read
and make sure you understood what we have publicly posted about its
readiness for use.  Your rant indicates to me that you haven't, or if
you have, you have seriously misunderstood what you read.


Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


Reply to: