Re: gtk 2.8 for gnome 2.12
- From: Miguel de Icaza <miguel ximian com>
- To: Luis Villa <luis villa gmail com>
- Cc: Andrew Sobala <aes gnome org>, GNOME Desktop <desktop-devel-list gnome org>, Bastien Nocera <hadess hadess net>
- Subject: Re: gtk 2.8 for gnome 2.12
- Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2005 15:39:14 -0400
> > The QA team does not consider a GTK+ 2.8-based GNOME more fragile than a
> > 2.6-based one. The QA team believes the issues involved in upgrading
> > this component of the GNOME desktop are no greater than upgrading any
> > other fundamental library.
> Let me rephrase a little: the QA team has been testing gtk 2.7, and
> while we realize that gtk is deeper in the stack and as a result can
> cause some deeply hidden and hard-to-debug bugs, at this point we feel
> that gtk 2.7 is essentially as stable as 2.6 for the end-user, and
> more importantly, bugs in 2.7 are being fixed quickly and reliably by
> the gtk team; bugs in 2.6 are not.
For how long has the QA team been running a Gtk 2.7.3 based desktop?
And what kinds of tests have been done? I mean to get an idea of the
testing happening in this area that lead to this very strong
We know that the testing at most has been running for six days.
It is pretty bold to state that six days (max) of testing has produced a
Gtk 2.7 that is as stable as 2.6; Lets not forget that after 2.6.0 was
released, bug fixes were applied for six months after that.
>  worth noting that if Novell is concerned about the stability of
> HEAD, or the violation of promises about quality, Novell is more than
> welcome to participate in the QA team.
As you well know, I am not in the desktop team at Novell, but I will let
those on that group know of your offer.
This is a breach of the time-line and a breach of deadlines that we have
imposed upon ourselves to follow.
When my candidacy for the Gnome Foundation two years ago was received a
few hours late I was barred from participating in the elections. So
when exactly did we begin to get lax with following rules?
> Seconded. If you believe gtk 2.7 is unstable, we need to know details
> and know now; we appreciate the efforts taken by the many who have
> actually used and tested it. Vague rumblings about potential
> instability don't count- I already played that card, have taken the
> plunge of using it, and have found it acceptable.
No matter how well intentioned our developers are with a change in scope
and size of this dimension Gtk 2.7 which has only been out for a month
is bound to have problems.
You of all people should know this. I do not run Gtk 2.7 nor work on
the group that works on that, but that does not disqualify me from
pointing out what has been a constant in the last 50 years of software
development. I do not see how Gtk 2.7 can break away from the physics
of software development.
No company would bet its future on something like this with proper
testing (which seems to have been decided by a few folks on irc).
] [Thread Prev