Re: [native-lang] OpenOffice.org 1.1.5 Release Candidate Is Here

Jacqueline McNally wrote:
> Andre Schnabel wrote:
> 
>> Hi Jacueline, all,
>>
>> first .. thanks for spreading the message.
>> But ...
>>
>>
>>> --- Ursprüngliche Nachricht ---
>>> Von: Jacqueline McNally <[email protected]>
>>> Betreff: [native-lang] OpenOffice.org 1.1.5 Release Candidate Is Here
>>>
>>> OpenOffice.org 1.1.5rc is ready for you to download now.  It's a
>>> release candidate, meaning that it has bugs, and we would like for
>>> you to work with us in finding them and reporting them.  
>>
>>
>>
>> I think we need to be a little more precise with our wording.
>> I just take wikipedia as reference, as it tells, what most people think,
>> what a RC is:
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Release_candidate#Release_candidate
>> "The term release candidate can refer to a final product, ready to 
>> release
>> unless fatal bugs emerge. ... for versions that are substantially 
>> complete, but still under test, ...
>> for final testing of versions that are believed to be bug-free, and 
>> may go
>> into production at any time."
> 
> 
> This definition works well if there is a finite group working on the 
> release cycle. But here, and with other OSS, everyone has the 
> opportunity to be involved in the progression of the software through 
> its release cycle.
> 
>> So, at this time, we *know* that our RC is not ready to be released. A
>> showstopper has been raised yesterday at the releases list. It has 
>> already
>> been marked as fixed, so I'd expect to see a new RC within the next few
>> days.
> 
> 
> Yes, we will, so we will have another one. But don't you think it is 
> better that many more people are able and willing to download and test 
> the "releases that are not yet production" ?

Jacqueline are you doing support ? You'll see that RC means nothing for 
people and this release will go in production just as if it's a stable.
> 
> Measured and experienced testers are vital, but end-users that are 
> willing to give it a go are also invaluable as they often do things in a 
> way that is difficult to include in regression and smoke tests.
> 
>> So .. the problem with the announcement is, that we cannot be shure 
>> who ist
>> testing what RC ... 
> 
> 
> The files have dates and it is the first rc.

users ignore that generally
> 
>> The thing, we have missed is to announce the availabilty of the RC at 
>> the QA
>> project and ask "experienced" people to do the tests. We do have a test
>> process and protocols, but we do not use it :-(
> 
> 
> We have always announced the release candidates widely assuming that the 
> QA team are in the thick of it and the most aware.

No, we always have announced our own language once QA passed. Can you 
imagine what it will be to answer to all that users meeting stoppers and 
the image we give ?
The process is : we do smoke tests, update the status page and announce 
our release once available. I don't understand why it shouldn't be 
respected other wise, no smoke tests are necessary and we can stop QAing 
our release.

Kind regards
Sophie


-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.323 / Virus Database: 267.8.13/47 - Release Date: 12/07/2005