[maemo-developers] QA process = bug fixing disincentive?
From: Kees Jongenburger kees.jongenburger at gmail.comDate: Sun Nov 1 09:18:40 EET 2009
- Previous message: Why should it be so hard and should I even bother with Extras for fremantle?
- Next message: Autobuilder repository priority ?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Hi Andrew and Atilla, On Sat, Oct 31, 2009 at 9:02 PM, Attila Csipa <maemo at csipa.in.rs> wrote: > On Saturday 31 October 2009 19:43:40 Andrew Flegg wrote: >> After working 'til stupid o'clock last night on a new version of Hermes, >> today someone's found a bug which'll impact a small number of people. The >> fix is trivial. >> However, I find myself *not* wanting to fix it as it'll need to go through >> another round of testing. > > There is a definitely a conflict there. I support Jeremiah's suggestion that > minor packaging/typo fixes that do not alter app functionality (e.g. when you > go from 1.0-maemo0 to 1.0-maemo1) should not reset app karma. Should require > some discipline so people would not abuse this, but still better than forcing > releases to be spaced 10+ days no matter how large the changes or how simple > the fix. I fully agree there is a conflict of interest but this gets an event more interesting problem when you scale up the numbers imagine 100 app updates on 1.000.000 users on one day. At that point I start not care anymore about the pain the developer has to go throe to get is apps delivered. I don't care about the carma. I care about the users who will get this update. Carma is out of the picture but still you are pushing a "bugfree" fix to a lot of people and that might benefit from testing. Given the :extra-testing week-end" I wonder if the current chosen scheme will scale up and how this can be improved. For the karma problem I suggest that the extras testing karma is keps "as is" to ensure testing happens but to find a solution for published apps otr possibly even increase karma on republished apps because of "activity and perseverance" , This all doesn't really solve the problem Andrew is facing: -How will "security" updates be handled?(this is the same kind of "small but required update") -Can we use the extras-testing in a more end-user friendly manner (asking the user on the device if he had problems). -How do we scale up. Greetings
- Previous message: Why should it be so hard and should I even bother with Extras for fremantle?
- Next message: Autobuilder repository priority ?
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]