| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Alec Warner wrote: |
| 5 |
> See my problem is that some of the features proposed aren't "two month" |
| 6 |
> testing features. Particularly when you rewrite decent portions of the |
| 7 |
> application you need longer than two months to get decent testing |
| 8 |
> coverage. Sure Unit Tests are helpful for that too, but they don't |
| 9 |
> cover all cases and really the best testing platform is to let the |
| 10 |
> people who play with portage do the testing and get some real results |
| 11 |
> prior to release. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Sure, it's possible that a "two month" release cycle might not be possible to achieve in some cases due to the nature of the changes that have occurred. However, that's not to say that it's never possible. Furthermore, we can be selective about the changes that are integrated during a particular release cycle, and changes that require disproportionate amounts of testing can be bumped from the current release cycle (for later integration, at a time that does not interfere with the release of well tested features). |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Zac |
| 16 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 17 |
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux) |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
iD8DBQFENt9n/ejvha5XGaMRAhY6AJ4nMLOkpQ+lmjpoEGPHJlgPjJXQoACg4REK |
| 20 |
lXvWWC3BLk/ttplyCd2BjDg= |
| 21 |
=xk4t |
| 22 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives