i would suggest to start testing in real hardware too....
On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Aleksey Bragin <alek...@reactos.org> wrote:
> You don't get it, because the procedures are incorrect and it's a drift
> away from the actual topic: I suggested starting our usual release process
> from the current trunk now, because otherwise there will be no fresh release
> for the coming CLT-2011 event in March.
>
> Quoting Ged's email from 11 Oct 2011 to this list ("Re: [ros-dev] ReactOS
> development cycle"):
> > A stable trunk should be an ongoing battle, not something reserved for
> release time.
> > There shouldn’t be more than a weeks worth of release work required (the
> release itself is no more than a few hours work).
> > ... It’s a tried and proven method used in most large open source
> projects and reactos is no exception
> I fully agree with that, because it makes it easier for the opensource
> project to progress.
>
> Now to the actual proposed procedures, which I can't find being anywhere
> near correct, and I explain why:
> Patches should be applied as soon as possible, there is no need to wait for
> a feature freeze announcement (points 1 and 2 in the Timo's list). Then, if
> a patch adds some feature, it contradicts with the point 1 of the list.
> Point 4 is also contradictive, high-priority bugs should also be fixed
> right away, without waiting for lower priority patches to be reviewed and
> regression solved in points 1-3.
> Point 5 - "usability testing" is fully valid, yes, our testers do a very
> good job at that.
>
>
> WBR,
> Aleksey.
>
>
>
> On Feb 15, 2011, at 1:04 PM, Ged Murphy wrote:
>
> I don't get it, Timo suggests some correct procedures to follow and it
>> gets
>> dismissed?
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org [mailto:ros-dev-boun...@reactos.org] On
>> Behalf Of Aleksey Bragin
>> Sent: 15 February 2011 09:35
>> To: ReactOS Development List
>> Subject: Re: [ros-dev] Releasing
>>
>> Yeah sure, this is quite important, however as I said, we just had a
>> "natural" feature freeze when only bugfixes were committed to trunk
>> for about 2 or 3 weeks, and all new features went to the branches
>> (with some exceptions, but still).
>> Also, patches were reviewed and committed and as for regressions,
>> previous release had even more, so there is a progress and positive
>> view of the newcoming release.
>> Usability test is also something which our testers do all the time
>> when preparing a release, this includes testing golden apps etc.
>> Victor could explain more on this topic, and I would really like
>> testers to manage this kind of stuff and do some minimal quality
>> assurance.
>>
>> Profit! :)
>>
>>
>> WBR,
>> Aleksey.
>>
>>
>> On Feb 15, 2011, at 12:43 AM, Timo Kreuzer wrote:
>>
>>
>>> I'd like to come back to this and suggest a procedure:
>>>
>>> 1. Officially announce feature freeze.
>>> 2. Address patches in bugzilla. we have 31 patches in bugzilla and
>>> we should have each of them reviewed and hopefully a lot comitted.
>>> 3. Address regressions. We have 47 (!!!) bugs marked as regressions
>>> in bugzilla. We should go through each of them and check if its any
>>> reasonable to fix them.
>>> 4. Address bugs with high severity / high priority. (5 blockers, 9
>>> critical, 50 major... doh!)
>>> 5. Do a "usability test". This means installing and doing the usual
>>> stuff, a user would do and note all problems, annoyances. Currently
>>> ros crashes very often with failed assertions and other stuff. If
>>> we ship this in a release, people will be very disappointed. so we
>>> seriously need to improve the situation.
>>> 6. ???
>>> 7. profit
>>>
>>> Timo
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Ros-dev mailing list
>>> Ros-dev@reactos.org
>>> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ros-dev mailing list
>> Ros-dev@reactos.org
>> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Ros-dev mailing list
>> Ros-dev@reactos.org
>> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev@reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
