The debian-private mailing list leak, part 1. Volunteers have complained about Blackmail. Lynchings. Character assassination. Defamation. Cyberbullying. Volunteers who gave many years of their lives are picked out at random for cruel social experiments. The former DPL's girlfriend Molly de Blanc is given volunteers to experiment on for her crazy talks. These volunteers never consented to be used like lab rats. We don't either. debian-private can no longer be a safe space for the cabal. Let these monsters have nowhere to hide. Volunteers are not disposable. We stand with the victims.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Release schedules and testing procedures



[ Please don't Cc: me when replying to my message on a mailing list. ]

(Bruce, I hope you won't mind getting a copy. I presumed you were
interested in the discussion.)

"Brian C. White":
> Month 0: (overlap with public-beta of previous release)
>  - everybody should be using the "frozen" release
>  - start uploading of packages into "unstable"

I think this breaks, because "everybody" won't be able to run
frozen, even if they want to. And even if we have a couple
of hundred people running frozen, we won't know which parts
they run. If no-one running frozen happens to be running, say,
a news server, then the news servers won't be tested.

If we set up a testing group, we can add a little bit of
bureaucracy and have testers fill in simple forms for all the
packages they test. The testing manager would keep track of
the comments for each package, and make decisions based on
the reports on whether a package is acceptable for release.

This would allow us to actually know what has been and what
hasn't been tested. The testing manager could direct willing
testers to untested software, making testing more efficient.

Assuming we can get the testing group working, I'd propose
the following scheme instead:

	Month 1:
		- previous release has just been made
	
		- preliminary list of packages that will form the
		  release is made (and other goals agreed on)
		
		- testers start working on packages that are
		  not expected to be updated before release
		  or that didn't make the previous release;
		  packages are moved to frozen or updated/fixed
		  based on test reports
		  
		- testers also, of course, work on testing bug
		  fixes to stable

	Month 2:
		- final list of packages (and their upstream versions)
		  intended for release is made; testers continue to test 
		  packages and move them into frozen

		- developers are free to upload any upgrades, but
		  only those on the final list are tested by the
		  testing group

	Month 3:
		- all packages intended for release have been
		  tested by testing group, and moved into frozen

		- Release-candidate CD-ROM images are produced

		- public beta testing of frozen begins
		
	End of month 3 or later:
		- When there are no critical problems left, 
		  a release is made

I'm not sure a single month is enough for testers to go through
all packages. Month 2 might need to be two months long.

-- 
Please read <http://www.iki.fi/liw/mail-to-lasu.html> before mailing me.
Please don't Cc: me when replying to my message on a mailing list.


Attachment: pgpgKTHJnSKn6.pgp
Description: PGP signature