The slip down memory lane

[Mike McGrath]

On Thu, 12 Aug 2010, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote:

> >>>>> "BN" == Bill Nottingham <notting at redhat.com> writes:
>
> BN> I can't help but note that the slips have become more frequent as we
> BN> started to actually *have* release criteria to test against. We
> BN> didn't slip nearly as much when we weren't testing it.
>
> To me this implies that we should begin testing earlier (or, perhaps,
> never stop testing) and treat any new failure as an event of
> significance.  It's tough to meet a six month cycle if we spend half of
> it telling people to expect everything to be broken.
>

Possibly also stop changing earlier?  It's hard to test a moving target.

Would an 8[1] month cycle cause fewer slips per release?  Fewer bugs?

	-Mike

[1] Just picked some number slightly longer then the current cycle for
purposes of discussion, not suggesting it.