mschwendt at gmail.com
Thu Aug 4 08:13:01 UTC 2011
On Wed, 03 Aug 2011 17:41:09 -0700, AW (Adam) wrote:
> I thought it'd be a good idea to take a step back and plan a strategy
> for post-Alpha TC1.
> We're in trouble for Alpha; we're a long way behind schedule, and we
> have a lot of blocker bugs remaining. TC1 is in pretty bad shape.
> By policy, we can't call a build an RC until all known blockers are
> fixed in it. I'm thinking we may be a way out from that.
> So, we have the choice of waiting for all blockers to be resolved before
> we do the next compose, which might take a while, or doing a TC2 with
> the most critical fixes in. What approach do people think we should
> take? Would a TC2 have any value or should we just clean up all the
> blockers we know about before we do another build, and make it RC1?
Obviously, there's a need for some deadline _after_ TC1 and _before_ TC2
for newly found critical bugs to be made a MUSTFIX item for TC2. Or else
that list could grow and delay TC2 again and again.
Where TC1 stopped testers from testing it further due to show-stoppers,
the same testers could try out the semi-fixed TC2 to find out how far they
come, confirm fixes, and perhaps find additional bugs (which they couldn't
find without a TC2).
More information about the test