To be clear, I'd like to hear from other people too. If anyone has any ideas about how we can get people to do this, by all means let's discuss it!
This need and concern has come up in many places many times over the years of the project. I have some thoughts on good ways to go about this (like the UBPL stuff, automated testing which is going on now, etc, etc), but how to get people to do things, especially in a volunteer organization like this, is another question... -David On Dec 6, 2009, at 12:29 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: > Hi David, > > I have no answers yet, I must says I have not even thought about it... > For the moment I only propose to concentrate on existing known bugs > repertoried in opened Jira issues. > > Thanks > > Jacques > () ascii ribbon campaign against HTML e-mail > /\ www.asciiribbon.org > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "David E Jones" <d...@me.com> > To: <dev@ofbiz.apache.org> > Sent: Sunday, December 06, 2009 6:36 PM > Subject: Re: Bugs and open Jira issues > > >> >> Jacques, >> >> I appreciate this feeling. In general OFBiz would benefit a lot from more >> testing, more definition of what to test against (ie what does a pass or >> fail look like, ie what is the design to test against), and in general more >> care about respecting others by not breaking things that already exist. >> >> The questions is, how do we get people to do this? >> >> -David >> >> >> On Dec 5, 2009, at 1:51 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'd like to express a feeling I have. Actually it's not only my own feeling >>> but also something some users have expressed recently. >>> >>> I'm quite happy to see that these last times a lot of effort have been made >>> in order to fix OFBiz (yes to fix OFBiz!) >>> It's really great to see new features in OFBiz. But I really wonder if we >>> should not slow down the pace in integrating new features for a short >>> period of time and should not make and even greatest effort to have a more >>> stable OFBiz. >>> >>> There are 180 bugs opened in Jira. Don't you think it's time for the >>> community to have a look at them and to fix the most important ones (109 >>> are considered as at least important) ? >>> >>> Thanks >>> >>> Jacques >>> >>> >>> > >
