Development process

[Enrico Weigelt]

* Jorge Villaseñor <salinasv at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, the majority of testing and fixing must happen when writing 
> code, then I guess it make sense to have this "testing/bug fix" 
> stage small. 

ACK. Anything that can be tested, should be done within the 
appropriate feature branches. Once a FB becomes ready, it gets 
rebased to current master and runs through the full test cycle.
They should be ACK'ed by several devs who didn't write that
actual code (enforce more eyes looking over it) before going
into master.

That's essentially the workflow we use @ MC.

> I think this still is a good idea to get the less bugs released 

ACK. Optimally, releases should be bug-free. Not entirely possible
in practise, but at least it that should be the goal.

If distros have to maintain bugfix-patches, upstream hasn't done
its homework ;-P
(at least, Gentoo has not a single patch for pidgin, so that doesn't 
seem a problem here :))


cu
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Enrico Weigelt, metux IT service -- http://www.metux.de/

 phone:  +49 36207 519931  email: weigelt at metux.de
 mobile: +49 174 7066481   icq:   210169427         skype: nekrad666
----------------------------------------------------------------------
 Embedded-Linux / Portierung / Opensource-QM / Verteilte Systeme
----------------------------------------------------------------------