---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:
Joel LeBlanc <address@hidden>Date: Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 7:34 PM
Subject: Re: release 3.2.1
To: "Robert T. Short" <
address@hidden>
Agreed. A bug tracker would be nice (Trac... or the like).
It would be nice to have anything labeled X.Y.Z to be "stable". Which is to say, it should go through some type of beta.
~Joel
On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Robert T. Short
<address@hidden> wrote:
Is there to be no comment on this at all? Both Daniel and I have made the same comments for the same reasons and probably because we have both experienced problems like this before. It isn't that Jaroslav is doing a bad job, but rather that the process (or rather lack of process) is guaranteed to have significant problems.
Bob
I think to support the branching paradigm we need a better organized team, possibly more bug reporting / tracking tools, and some type of beta schedule. One has to resist the desire to get new features to market ASAP, and instead set versions aside so that the whole group can test-run the version over a month. Just let the developers site know there is a new release candidate for beta testing. Any bugs could then be entered into a bug tracker (which we don't have) for the particular version. Without that, one or two release versions, a developer version...and soon it is too much for any one person to keep track of. If it were a smaller project, perhaps, but not one this size.
Also, there are certain hunks of code that are "tricky programming" and should be modified only long before a release. unwind_protect is one of those. Stacks, recursions, interrupts, and such have a lot of paths and conditions that are easy to overlook.
Dan