Mark Martin wrote: > -Ask the Testing CG to devise a strategy for quality assurance, > focusing on some determined levels of compatibility and stability as > they might devise. Again, make the output of such work intended as > guidance and as high level as necessary (but no higher). It might be > prudent, too, to ask that community to define just what compatibility > might mean. Or perhaps that's a question better posed to the ARC? >
Mark, Currently we are talking about distribution certification in the trademark-policy-dev discussion. Here is a recent post: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/trademark-policy-dev/2008-February/000557.html It looks like it's time to figure out how to implement a software quality assurance strategy in the Testing CG. I don't think we should wait for the trademark issues to be resolved. Quality is needed no matter what name we give the distributions. The ARC CG would definitely be involved in shaping the overall strategy. Especially with regard to interface compatibility and stability. Solaris uses something like the Agile software development model, where we go through a complete development and test cycle every two weeks: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agile_software_development http://opensolaris.org/os/community/on/os_dev_process/ Smaller OpenSolaris distributions will probably need to use something much lighter weight, but it might be a place to start. Cheers, Jim _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
