Am 14.08.13 20:21, schrieb Rob Weir:
On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 1:36 PM, Edwin Sharp <el...@mail-page.com> wrote:
Dear Rob
The 4.0 release was too ambitious - we should advance in smaller steps.
Nothing compares to general public testing - betas and release candidates
should not be avoided.
TestLink cases should be less comprehesive (in terms of feature coverage) and
more stress testing oriented.
The number to consider here is how many defects were found and fixed
during the 4.0.0 testing, before the general public users had access?
I assume it was quite substantial. If so, the TestLink usage was
effective. In other words, we might have found fewer bugs without
using it.
This is important to keep in mind: we want to prevent or find more
bugs, but we're not starting from zero. We're starting from a process
that does a lot of things right.
I like the idea of a public beta. But consider the numbers. The 40
or so regressions that were reported came from an install base (based
on download figures since 4.0.0 was released) of around 3 million
users. Realistically, can we expect anywhere near that number in a
public beta? Or is it more likely that a beta program has 10,000
users or fewer? I don't know the answer here. But certainly a
well-publicized and used beta will find more than a beta used by just
a few hundred users.
The public beta is from my point of view realy important. Even you have
only 10'000 Downloads of a beta, you have normaly verry experianced
Users there, like power users from Companies. They provide realy valua
feedback. So from my point of view, this is one of the moast important
changes we have to do. For all Feature release a beta version. And don't
forget, people are realy happy to do beta tests. but many of them are
maybe not willing to follow a mailing list.
Greetings Raphael
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: qa-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: qa-h...@openoffice.apache.org
