Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 10:06:42 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: rkw@dataplex.net (Richard Wackerbarth) Cc: Joe Greco <jgreco@brasil.moneng.mei.com>, freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: IP bugs in FreeBSD 2.1.5 Message-ID: <27935.845485602@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 16 Oct 1996 09:15:08 MDT." <v01540b00ae8aa9b6cd6d@[204.69.236.50]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> >What is wrong with the ALPHA/BETA/RELEASE cycle (aside from the fact that > >it has been pretty much abused/ignored for the last few releases)? > > "Pretty much"? I feel that it has been totally abused. That's simply because you haven't kept up to date with events. The whole ALPHA/BETA naming cycle was *discontinued* just as soon as I started making 2.2-current (and even one or two 2.1-stable) snapshots regularly. They filled the same niche, and the whole ALPHA/BETA system was falling apart anyway due to a lack of concerted testing. I don't mean to denigrate the work of the ALPHA and BETA testers at all here but, in the early days, I'd say we had *real* ALPHA and BETA cycles because we had a tight group of testing folks who essentially performed the functions of a good QA department in a software development company - they delivered *timely* feedback in a predictable manner and I was able to count on a 15-20 day testing cycle as having genuine meaning. In time, however, these folks got tired or moved into real jobs, or graduate school programs, or whatever, and the system started to collapse. Several testers remained dedicated throughout (and you know who you all are) and their efforts were of heroic proportions, but they still couldn't do all the work of their departed brethren. After an especially weak BETA, I decided that what was needed was more of a "regular train" system, which made frequent stops and let anyone hop on or off along the way, as time and inclination permitted. This became the SNAPs and the rest is history - it's worked out, on the whole, a lot better than the ALPHA/BETA cycles as less on-demand time is required for testing. If you've got a final bang in the middle of one SNAP, you wait for the next one. I will not be bringing back the ALPHA/BETA/RELEASE cycle. It simply stopped working for me, and an non-working mechanism helps me not at all when the crunch is on. Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?27935.845485602>