1 |
On Sun, 01 Jun 2014 13:33:22 +0200 |
2 |
Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> This makes me wonder about the real status of some of this arches. I |
5 |
> know that now we will probably see how Agostino goes ahead and does |
6 |
> all the work (that is nice and I really welcome his work trying to |
7 |
> keep this arches in shape), but also makes me thing if makes sense to |
8 |
> keep this agostino-dependency for this arches more and more time. |
9 |
> What will occur if he is not around sometime? :/ |
10 |
|
11 |
As I've said many times before, having a single person handle much of |
12 |
the work most of the time causes coordinated volunteering for the work |
13 |
to fail as it takes more time to coordinate stuff than to do the actual |
14 |
work for fear of duplicating the work or because of duplicating the |
15 |
work. |
16 |
|
17 |
On top of these problems you get the technical issues of having a |
18 |
single point of failure in doing the actual testing and the bias that a |
19 |
successful test on one arch might cause in testing on the next one. On |
20 |
top of that, the automation of setting up the test targets, testing and |
21 |
keywording with a single implementation is more prone to errors and |
22 |
omissions. |
23 |
|
24 |
I could point out many examples of bug reports where this went wrong. |
25 |
It happens at least once a week. Forcing more eyeballs on |
26 |
keywording and stabilisation would greatly help in both preventing and |
27 |
solving such issues. |
28 |
|
29 |
|
30 |
jer |