On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 11:49:46AM +0200, Rick Spencer wrote: > On Mon, Jun 18, 2012 at 7:02 AM, Martin Pitt <martin.p...@ubuntu.com> wrote: > > So regular manual testing rounds are still required, and the points > > when we do them might just as well be called "milestones". > > But if the focus is testing, we should optimize the schedule around > testing. For example, I think Ubuntu would benefit from more frequent > "rounds" of such in depth testing than the current alpha/beta > milestones provide. (I think every 2 weeks would be a good cadence).
Scott and Thierry mentioned the value of alphas as reference images, such as for isolating when a regression entered the repo. The main problem I've seen with this is that the alphas are spaced just a bit too far apart. So, if we go to a 2 week cadence on the testing, and the isos used in that testing were kept available through the release, that would help on that point as well. Bryce -- ubuntu-devel mailing list ubuntu-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-devel
