a bit offside:
Sunburned Surveyor schrieb:
> Stefan,
>
> This is an excellent e-mail. (By the way, I saw your picture online
> the other day and was surprised at how young you are. I guess your
> wisdom had me picturing you as some old university professor.) :]
people usually guess my age 5 year
Stefan Steiniger wrote:
Hello,
> took me a long time to come to this email.
> It is longer than intended .. and i actually don't want to start the
> discussion on this now, as some people are still in holidays and i am
> busy with other things as well.
> 1) my comments on the release strategy
Stefan,
This is an excellent e-mail. (By the way, I saw your picture online
the other day and was surprised at how young you are. I guess your
wisdom had me picturing you as some old university professor.) :]
If we came up with a bug classification system I would be willing to
spend a couple of w
Hei,..
took me a long time to come to this email.
It is longer than intended .. and i actually don't want to start the
discussion on this now, as some people are still in holidays and i am
busy with other things as well.
1) my comments on the release strategy
===
* first
I know Stefan will comment when he gets back from vacation, but in the
meantime I'd like to know how we go about implementing this
suggestion.
What things do we need to change? Can someone give me a bulleted list of tasks?
I guess I'm a little confused. Can someone put up some sample release rule
Michaël Michaud wrote:
Hi,
> Here are some thoughts about releases and bug management.
> I think we miss some rules to decide when a new version of OJ has to be
> released, and that lack of visibility may be a disadvantage for OJ's
> adoption.
I totally agree with this point.
> The release ru
Hei Guys,
i return later on that when i am back home
currently i am on a conference near Dublin.
stefan
> Hi,
>
> Here are some thoughts about releases and bug management.
> I think we miss some rules to decide when a new version of OJ has to be
> released, and that lack of visibility may be a d
Larry Becker a écrit :
>@Michaël,
>
> I think that bug tracker level 1 is lowest and level 9 is highest.
>
>
Hey, maybe I inverted. If so, I'm a very bad candidate to sort the list ;-)
>Looking through the list again, I don't see anything that I would
>classify as a major bug. To me, a major
Hi SS, thanks for your answer,
>[1] It requires that someone sort and maintain the bug-tracker list.
>
>
Just supervise priorities set to the bugs and feature requests, much
less work than fixing bugs and adding features I think :-)
>[2] It requires some of us to quit working on out "pet funct
@Michaël,
I think that bug tracker level 1 is lowest and level 9 is highest.
Looking through the list again, I don't see anything that I would
classify as a major bug. To me, a major bug is a stability problem
with OJ in general. You can break some cases of obscure features and
99% of users wi
Michael,
I like the concept behind this suggestion. I only see a couple of
obstacles to its implementation:
[1] It requires that someone sort and maintain the bug-tracker list.
[2] It requires some of us to quit working on out "pet functionality
improvements' and to start fixing bugs.
I don't th
Hi,
Here are some thoughts about releases and bug management.
I think we miss some rules to decide when a new version of OJ has to be
released, and that lack of visibility may be a disadvantage for OJ's
adoption.
The release rules should be linked to bug reports and feature requests,
but bug re
12 matches
Mail list logo
