Date: Mon, 20 Dec 1999 17:59:51 -0800 From: Jamie Norwood <mistwolf@mushhaven.net> To: Jason Young <doogie@staff.accessus.net> Cc: "'Colin'" <cwass99@home.com>, freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG, "'jkh@freebsd.org'" <jkh@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: After 3.4 finally goes out the door Message-ID: <19991220175951.A59081@mushhaven.net> In-Reply-To: <ABD44D466F85D311A69900A0C900DB6BC566@staff.accessus.net> References: <ABD44D466F85D311A69900A0C900DB6BC566@staff.accessus.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I agree with this totally. I also feel someone should step forward and coordinate; I didn't do more than install and see if it worked as I am not familier with how things should be tested. Also, I feel that some things should be made available such as CVSUP scripts and such to make sure the people involved really are testing the right things. Could we maybe get a 'branch' named 'qa' that would show rc or qa in the uname output? That would also make things easier as we could then test that tree for the cd, and bug fixes that are essential could then be made to that tree only, and normal developement could continue on the -STABLE/-RELEASE tree. Jamie On Mon, Dec 20, 1999 at 07:50:12PM -0600, Jason Young wrote: > > I think it's a good idea to keep the list around, but I don't think that the > QA volunteers were really used to their full potential. > > I tested when I could (early in the testing cycle), and I feel that most of > my efforts were for naught, because as usual, a large percentage of the > commits in the testing period were very last minute (after most or all of > the QA builds). > > Yeah, it's a free software project and nobody's paid, and what gets out the > door is still a fine piece of work (and major kudos to jkh and the rest of > the guys on that). But, I don't think much meaningful testing of the real > release was accomplished due to all the really really late changes. The last > minute "oh I really need such and such MFC'd" trips are killers (sysinstall, > moused, you won't have to rack your brain too hard for examples). > > I assume that the schedule for 3.5-RELEASE is pretty much set already. Would > it be possible to back most of that schedule up about a week, and in the > week before the CD is cut, put the "pretty-much-final, we-really-mean-it, > won't touch it unless the release is definitely fscked" up for general FTP? > If the schedules are set well in advance, nobody will be hurting or > complaining of the loss of one week's time in a three or four month -STABLE > release cycle. The QA volunteers need a set release to assure its quality, > ya know? This is no extra work or major change for anyone. > > I think that if we could get the "frozen" release candidate out there in > front of people for at least a week or so, we could muchly reduce the size > of our ERRATA files. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Colin [mailto:cwass99@home.com] > > Sent: Monday, December 20, 1999 7:18 PM > > To: freebsd-qa@FreeBSD.ORG > > Subject: After 3.4 finally goes out the door > > > > > > I realize we got off to a rather slow start, but all > > things considered > > better than many expected. My question is, is there any > > intent for this list > > to survive the release of 3.4, as basically a home for people with the > > time/energy/hardware to talk about testing? > > I think it would be a marvelous idea, assuming > > sufficient interest of > > course, to continue this with 4.0-RC when that starts the > > long arduous path > > from -CURRENT ;) > > > > Cheers, > > Colin > > > > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > > with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-qa" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19991220175951.A59081>