Roger Luedecke wrote:
On Tuesday, November 22, 2011 07:59:50 AM Per Jessen wrote:
Roger Luedecke wrote:
Part of the problem is people don't do early testing so we can catch bugs better before release. Everybody wants it stable, but few are willing to risk some instability to assure a better result for us all.
I'm not sure we have any data to really substantiate that. At some point, I did sort of half-way propose we should be using a test-case tracking system, but given the size of this project, it's probably not a very good idea. 15 years ago I helped write and document about 1000 test-cases for a project I was managing. There was about 20 people involved in total, and even those 1000 cases were too much.
So a structured QA testing process?
Yep, that's it. More or less.
Could you explain this a bit further? The hamsters in my head are making the wheels whirl, and I sense an interesting idea coming on.
It's probably not very on-topic here, -project or -testing would be better, but very briefly: a test-case could be: "installation on a software RAID1 array" or "installation over WLAN (hardware #45)". Tracking the test progress could be a simple log of a) testcase b) software being tested (e.g. 11.4, 12.1RC1 etc.) c) optional/minor variations d) who tested it e) results At some point, as and if determined by the powers that be, it might be possible to add release-criteria such "X percent of tests-cases were successful". -- Per Jessen, Zürich (1.9°C) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse+owner@opensuse.org