Rockbox mail archive

• Next message: Felix Becker: "Re: The future"
• Previous message: Brian: "Re: Batteries?"
• In reply to: Fred Maxwell: "RE: BUGS - ARGH"
• Next in thread: Björn Stenberg: "Re: BUGS - ARGH"
• Reply: Björn Stenberg: "Re: BUGS - ARGH"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

With regards to what Fred said I have to agree.I am a system test consultant and even though I can see what Daniel is saying with regards to daily builds - this approach is known to be fraught with danger especially from a test perspective. It is ok to use for small numbers and small projects.Following a standard test strategy you always have a 'baseline' to compare against - you need a known constant - otherwise how can you refer back when checking for bugs/defects?A solution here maybe instead of having a daily build have a weekly build in which there can be a fixed baseline. Of course the daily builds should continue for those who wish to be cutting edge. Bugs can then be raised against a know build that the majority of people are using for example in conjunction with what Fred wrote I would expect a large percentage of the Rockbox users are either running version 2 or version 2.1. For my own use I take a copy of the daily build around once every two weeks and even then it is a
 version from a week ago - once the newly introduced bugs have been fixed!regards
John

---------------------------------
   BT Yahoo! Broadband - Save £80 when you order online today. Hurry! Offer ends 21st December 2003. The way the internet was meant to be.

• Next message: Felix Becker: "Re: The future"
• Previous message: Brian: "Re: Batteries?"
• In reply to: Fred Maxwell: "RE: BUGS - ARGH"
• Next in thread: Björn Stenberg: "Re: BUGS - ARGH"
• Reply: Björn Stenberg: "Re: BUGS - ARGH"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]