On Sep 24, 2009, at 12:48, Aniello Del Sorbo wrote: > 2009/9/24 Quim Gil <quim....@nokia.com>: >> >> ext Aniello Del Sorbo wrote: >>> I am not developing for Apple because of their approval process and >>> their desire of control. >> >> What is your opinion about Deboan, Ubuntu, Fedora... all of them >> having >> also QA processes in place in order to make it to their stable >> releases? >> > I don't know them.
All community developed projects have a Quality Assurance process. Debian's, which is what Maemo is based on, looks like this; 1. Submit your app to autobuilders 2. If it fails to build from source, start over at 1 3. If it builds, it stays in the new queue for ten days 4. After ten days it automatically gets promoted to 'testing' 5. After (roughly) eighteen months, testing is frozen (no more new apps) 6. After all Release Critical bugs are fixed, testing becomes stable Maemo is trying to innovate and crowd source the quality control and shrink that time as much as possible. > But I understand it's a different matter and I think I am missing the > point of the whole Extras Testing infrastructure. > I see it as a very useful tool to help bringing good quality > application in the hands of people. > I like it. > My only complaint is on who has the final word. Your software lives in an ecosystem of autobuilders, repositories, and end user tablets. It has to co-operate with all these resources to be of value to a user. You have a responsibility to not wipe out a user's hard drive, etc. I understand your interest in getting your software into your user's hands faster, but the QA process will help with this. If we can build the reputation of packages in Extras being high-quality, users will be more willing to download them. We have to build that reputation first. Jeremiah _______________________________________________ maemo-developers mailing list maemo-developers@maemo.org https://lists.maemo.org/mailman/listinfo/maemo-developers
