Hey all,
I am wondering if we are going to be testing our future software possibly
within the public. The reason being, rather than our wasting time finding
tiny errors and such, we could hold a 'beta test' and give the software to
around 1000 people or so, and tell them to report any tiny bug th
Well I think the CDs handed out should not aim at testing
the sword. They are gifts for people who want to use sword.
But we should have beta phases and collect the feedback in
future. This is possible because of the Internet(tm). People
who are interested can download and try.
The new sword web
EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2001 10:14 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [sword-devel] Testing Programs...
Well I think the CDs handed out should not aim at testing
the sword. They are gifts for people who want to use sword.
But we should have beta phases and collect the feedba
> I am wondering if we are going to be testing our future software
possibly
> within the public. The reason being, rather than our wasting time
finding
> tiny errors and such, we could hold a 'beta test' and give the
software to
> around 1000 people or so, and tell them to report any tiny bug the
At 11:07 AM 7/4/2001 -0700, Chris Little wrote:
>suggest that we also set up a beta modules ftp site where modules would
>undergo similar scrutiny to a new version of Sword. Believe it or not,
>database integrity has increased greatly with some of the new tools
>available to module makers, but er
> I think once the new site is up, it would be very smart to release betas
> publicly. Technically 1.5.2 should be considered beta, even if it is
> more stable than 1.4.7 was. I'd like to go a tiny step further and
> suggest that we also set up a beta modules ftp site where modules would
> under
> Perhaps the download areas should be reproduced three ways, archive
> versions, current versions, and beta versions.
What should archive versions be good for? I hope that modules will not become
worse...
Martin
At 10:19 PM 7/4/2001 +0200, Martin Gruner wrote:
>What should archive versions be good for? I hope that modules will not become
>worse...
There are people that end up being happy with the functionality of what
they have and dread upgrading. If they don't need a new feature they stay
with what t
