Just a comment on this...
I used to work for a pretty big Unix OS vendor in the operating systems
development group. 90% of the bug fixes I applied were never found by
the QA group (otherwise they would have been fixed long before I ever
worked there :-). Where they really found problems were c
SteveB wrote:
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> > Wes Peters
> > Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2000 11:29 PM
> > To: Drew Eckhardt
> > Cc: SteveB; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: R
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of
> Wes Peters
> Sent: Saturday, December 23, 2000 11:29 PM
> To: Drew Eckhardt
> Cc: SteveB; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Sitting on hands (no longer Re: FreeBSD vs
>
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 12:28:36AM -0700, Wes Peters wrote:
> isn't coming to the forefront: commercial companies have formal QA staff
> because their development staff either can't or won't do the QA themselves.
I would not agree with that at all. Commercial companies have format QA
because it
Drew Eckhardt wrote:
>
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, admin@bsdfan
> .cncdsl.com writes:
> >Here's the thing about open software that still concerns me. My
> >background is with the major software development tools companies, so
> >that is my point of reference. It is great that code is availa
SteveB wrote:
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2000 9:54 AM
> > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Sitting on hands (no longer Re: FreeBSD vs
> > Linux, Solaris,
On Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 12:03:23PM -0800, Gilbert Gong wrote:
> > It would just make pitching FreeBSD and other open OS's in the
> > enterprise a lot easier if there was an QA process that official
> > releases went through. Also volunteering to QA would be a good
> > training ground to gain fami
* Gilbert Gong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001221 18:45] wrote:
> > It would just make pitching FreeBSD and other open OS's in the
> > enterprise a lot easier if there was an QA process that official
> > releases went through. Also volunteering to QA would be a good
> > training ground to gain familiari
> It would just make pitching FreeBSD and other open OS's in the
> enterprise a lot easier if there was an QA process that official
> releases went through. Also volunteering to QA would be a good
> training ground to gain familiarity with a OS and a chance to
> communicate with developers.
>
> S
Greg Black wrote:
>
> Mark Newton wrote:
>
> > I get concerned that those who point to a lack of a QA cycle in open
> > source software are missing the point entirely: They're focussing on
> > the 'process' they're familiar with so much that they don't seem to
> > acknowledge that alternative a
Mark Newton wrote:
> I get concerned that those who point to a lack of a QA cycle in open
> source software are missing the point entirely: They're focussing on
> the 'process' they're familiar with so much that they don't seem to
> acknowledge that alternative approaches can demonstrate simil
On Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 11:53:50AM -0600, Peter Seebach wrote:
> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "SteveB" writes:
> >In the open source
> >world is there a official QA process or group. Is there a FreeBSD
> >test suite that releases go through. QA is unglamorous work, but
> >needs to be do
On Thu, Dec 21, 2000 at 12:40:22PM -0800, SteveB wrote:
> I don't have a lot of time, but I would volunteer if there was a QA
> project.
Good QA takes time.
--
-- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
GNU is Not Unix / Linux Is Not UniX
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "uns
SteveB wrote:
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Drew Eckhardt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2000 12:15 PM
> > To: SteveB
> > Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Subject: Re: Sitting on hands (no longer Re: FreeBSD vs
> &g
> -Original Message-
> From: Drew Eckhardt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2000 12:15 PM
> To: SteveB
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Sitting on hands (no longer Re: FreeBSD vs
> Linux, Solaris,
> and NT)
>
>
> In mes
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, admin@bsdfan
.cncdsl.com writes:
>Here's the thing about open software that still concerns me. My
>background is with the major software development tools companies, so
>that is my point of reference. It is great that code is available and
>fixes are made and pushed
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "SteveB" wri
tes:
>It would just make pitching FreeBSD and other open OS's in the
>enterprise a lot easier if there was an QA process that official
>releases went through.
There might be; I haven't looked. I am pretty happy with the results of
whatever's being don
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 21, 2000 9:54 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Sitting on hands (no longer Re: FreeBSD vs
> Linux, Solaris,
> and NT)
>
> >In the open source
&
SteveB wrote:
> Here's the thing about open software that still concerns me. My
> background is with the major software development tools companies, so
> that is my point of reference. It is great that code is available and
> fixes are made and pushed out, but who is doing real testing of these
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "SteveB" wri
tes:
>With commercial software (well at least the places I worked) nothing
>could go out the door without a complete QA cycle performed on it.
Yes. This is why the open systems have "releases" every so often; a
release has been run through something m
Here's the thing about open software that still concerns me. My
background is with the major software development tools companies, so
that is my point of reference. It is great that code is available and
fixes are made and pushed out, but who is doing real testing of these
fixes. Sure the obvious
21 matches
Mail list logo
