Re: bzzzt

On Feb 12, 2008 9:31 AM, Olav Vitters <olav bkor dhs org> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 09:15:49AM -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
> > On Feb 12, 2008 8:50 AM, Olav Vitters <olav bkor dhs org> wrote:
> > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2008 at 08:24:12AM -0500, Luis Villa wrote:
> > > > The six month release cycle is not an all-controlling god, and bugs in
> > > > one known, specific subsystem are not undebuggable without wide
> > > > release (which was KDE's most valid excuse). If it isn't ready for
> > > > wide use, it isn't and shouldn't be a GNOME .0. It isn't 'too late' to
> > > > decide that; you're the QA team, dammit- it is your job to say no
> > > > right up to the very last minute, and demand extra time to protect the
> > > > users.
> > >
> > > I don't understand the message. There is missing functionality. The
> > > focus should be to implement that on time. Not sure what there is to QA
> > > about functionality that we know is missing.
> >
> > _quality_ includes functionality. If the quality isn't good enough for
> > our users (because either stability or functionality is missing) then
> > say 'hey, we can't release this' not 'well, it sucks, but we'll
> > release it anyway.'
> So we should focus on getting more development done. Promising we'll
> release when ready means alexl has to code the rest plus distributions
> will use beta stuff.
> I think you misunderstand the message by Andre as truth and not as
> "let's get some developers into action". It was overstated so more devs
> would help[1]. There is already some more dev work going on.

Ah! I agree with that as a general strategy, but my sense is that
delay is a better threat than shipping on time with bugs. Delay means
the dev don't get to work on their new toys, so it is important to
them. Shipping with bugs is a problem that affects regular users, not
the dev (as much, since they build from CVS anyway) so it is less of a


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