Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2012 13:38:16 -0600 From: Mark Linimon <linimon@lonesome.com> To: H <hm@hm.net.br> Cc: Erich Dollansky <erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com>, Mark Felder <feld@feld.me>, freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD9 and the sheer number of problem reports Message-ID: <20120226193816.GB31385@lonesome.com> In-Reply-To: <4F4A254E.60200@hm.net.br> References: <4F46847D.4010908@my.gd> <201202261630.57372.erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com> <4F4A068B.2090807@hm.net.br> <201202261800.16269.erichfreebsdlist@ovitrap.com> <4F4A254E.60200@hm.net.br>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Feb 26, 2012 at 09:27:58AM -0300, H wrote: > it is release engineering who could establish a little bit more time > between code-freeze and RELEASE As you will see from the (very) long discussion that you are about to read, there has to be a compromise. As it was, the release process was too long, not too short. Yes, we would like to get more testers pre-release, but that seems to be more easily said than done. Ideas appreciated. You will also see in the thread that: - it is not possible to release bug-free code, and in fact - it is not possible to release code with no regressions whatsoever if you are to ever release anything at all. To summarize: yes, we do care: and yes, these are classical software engineering problems that can only be dealt with, not solved completely. mcl
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120226193816.GB31385>