Rockbox.org home
release
dev builds
extras
themes manual
wiki
device status forums
mailing lists
IRC bugs
patches
dev guide



Rockbox mail archive

Subject: Re: Release thoughts

Re: Release thoughts

From: Frank Gevaerts <frank_at_gevaerts.be>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2009 21:18:22 +0100

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 11:58:45AM -0800, Jonathan Gordon wrote:
> 2009/11/19 Frank Gevaerts <frank_at_gevaerts.be>:
> >
> > My proposal is to involve our users here, and to do the following:
> > - Starting from the day of the freeze, we provide RC builds.
> > - We provide a feedback template that helps people figure out what needs
> >  testing, and to ensure that the resulting reports are reasonably easy
> >  to handle.
> > - Someone collects these reports and consolidates them to flyspray
> >  tasks for the actual bugs.
>
> >From my experience, trying to get anyone (devs or users) to test
> patches and builds has been mostly wasted effort.

For specific patch builds, it tends to be. Those are usually marked as
experimental and possibly broken though. These on the other hand are RC
builds, so people who would feel uncomfortable with the former may still
test the latter.

> And even if it wasnt, getting mass testing on RC builds is a bit late
> in the game. The bugs that show up then should have been found when
> the feature that added them was added.

They should, but they don't, so I don't think that that is a valid
argument.

I'm mostly thinking about bugs like FS#10546 here (metronome doesn't
work on iriver). Things that are really obvious, but of course only if
you look.

Do you see another way to solve the problems I noted, or do you think
they mostly don't exist?

Frank

-- 
"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it." - Brian W. Kernighan
Received on 2009-11-19

Page was last modified "Jan 10 2012" The Rockbox Crew
aaa