ahahah, i agre with most of your parts.

Anyhow, the SF <--> Github differences should be adressed to avoid bad
version number (understand: differents). I also understand SF audience
is not negligeable so simply closing it seems an harsh option at this time.


Le 14/10/2015 18:13, Doursenaud, Raphaël a écrit :
> Ok, who's up for a software lifecycle and version numbering schemes
> thesis? Maybe you can get a PhD out of it!
>
> Jokes aside, the thing is that NO software release cycle is perfect
> because various audiences seek different things.
>
> FLOSS developers tend to prefer "release often, release early" and
> "semantic versioning".
> Perfectionists are going for "when it's ready" and "I only need to
> increase one number since every release is just perfect".
> Traditional corporate vendors usually prefer "Rush it out the door, we
> need it for yesterday, just try to hide defects under the carpet and
> colorful design" and "We don't care, give us the biggest number so
> marketing can show off".
> Integrators and users want "Something with all the bells and whistles
> that works out of the box, forever" and "No new releases, they are a
> pain to deploy, so give me all the features in this one".
> To which I reply: "Not gonna happen!".
>
> The current process is designed around the need to get code out at a
> regular pace with some predictability to it.
> It gives a version (N-2) supported roughly 1 and a half year.
> I don't think it's that great, but at least it's there!
>
> IMO The Dolibarr project's lifecyle is missing some key elements to
> achieve better releases quality before even thinking about changing
> the release periodicity or version numbering.
>
> Here's a non exhaustive list from the top of my head:
>
>   * Standardized and enforced good commits content and messages.
>   * Formal code reviews for everyone including the project maintainers.
>   * Continuous integration used properly. Ie. no one can bypass it. Ever.
>   * The previous two boils down to: no one pushes directly to the main
>     repository.
>   * Proper stabilization branches. One example of this is git flow but
>     other strategies are out there.
>   * Proper tagging. Having releases in the wild that do not match the
>     repository tags is a waste of everyone's time.
>   * Proper pre-release test cycle. With multiple alpha, beta and RC
>     releases. All properly advertised to get people involved.
>   * Testing procedures and tooling.
>   * Automated building for all pre-releases.
>   * Formal testing both automated (Think unit tests, selenium, test
>     instances, fuzzing…) and manual.
>   * Final release should be exactly the same as the last RC.
>   * Long term commitment to lean toward modern coding practices
>     (refactoring, objectification, automate everything…)
>   * Bugs bissecting to fix them at the root, not only in the reported
>     versions.
>   * Encourage unit tests for critical bug fixes to prevent regressions.
>   * Community driven design before coding.
>   * …
>
> As you can see, there's a lot of work and it can't be done by any
> single individual. The whole community needs to get involved.
> But for that to happen, there should be a strong commitment from the
> maintainers and core developers to stick to it and make it happen.
>
> We've already made some good progresses since switching to GitHub.
> Code is reviewed more often and bug reports are all assessed and
> properly tagged (I devote some of my own time to that weekly).
>
> Keep in mind that all of that is a community effort, so the best thing
> to do is step up to the plate, pick a task and do something ;)
>
> Looking forward to your contributions!
>
> 2015-10-14 8:23 GMT+02:00 Jean-François Ferry <[email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>>:
>
>     Hi all,
>
>     Le 13/10/2015 18:38, Charles Benke a écrit :
>>
>>     This is not the right question to ask,
>>
>>     The right question is "how to ensure that when there is the most
>>     download of dolibarr (September to March) the broadcast version
>>     (.2 like) is as stable as possible for novice users"
>>
>>     To answer this question we must look at the proposed roadmap with  :
>>
>>     -  .0 in april,
>>
>>     -  .1 in june-july
>>
>>     -  .2 in september
>>
>     We are doing wrong since a long time... Versions shouldn't be
>     related to any date but to software structure. Please see
>     http://semver.org/ :)
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Dolibarr-dev mailing list
>     [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>     https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/dolibarr-dev
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> *Raphaël Doursenaud*
> Directeur technique (CTO)
> Expert certifié en déploiement Google Apps
> <https://gpcsolutions.fr/raphael-doursenaud-google-apps-certified-deployment-specialist>
> +33 (0)5 35 53 97 13 - +33 (0)6 68 48 20 10
>
> <http://gpcsolutions.fr>
> http://gpcsolutions.fr
> Technopole Hélioparc
> 2 avenue du Président Pierre Angot
> 64053 PAU CEDEX 9
> SARL GPC.solutions au capital de 7 500 € - R.C.S. PAU 528 995 921
> <http://wiki.dolibarr.org/index.php/Dolibarr_suppliers_France#GPC.solutions>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Dolibarr-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/dolibarr-dev

_______________________________________________
Dolibarr-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/dolibarr-dev

Répondre à