From: Beman Dawes (bdawes_at_[hidden])
Date: 2007-06-06 23:10:47
Stefan Seefeld wrote:
>>> * We don't test the build and install process.
>> What do you want to test? In any case it doesn't make release "unstable"
> The release (well, in fact, packaging) process was retarded because a substantial
> number of bugs only turned up during that very last phase, simply because that
> wasn't tested at all. Had packaging (etc.) be part of the regular testing procedure
> those bugs weren't present, at that time in the release process.
Thomas Witt has made the point strongly that a number of serious
problems getting the release ready had to do with packaging,
documentation, and other issues that are not currently covered by testing.
So, yes, let's try to increase "testing" to cover a broader spectrum of
problems. That will have to evolved over time, and in a way that
integrates with our more traditional testing.
The inspection reports are a start. Let's see what else we can come up with!
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk