[Sugar-devel] Are we ready for code freeze?

[Thomas Gilliard]

On 08/29/2013 05:35 AM, Thomas Gilliard wrote:
> On 08/28/2013 11:03 AM, Gonzalo Odiard wrote:
>> I agree in the need of testing.
>> Testing is more difficult this cycle because:
>> * We have less developers working.
>> * We don't have the images we usually used to test on our main 
>> hardware platform (XO*) yet.
>> I don't know if any test is done now on Fedora 20 Sugar spin,
> Soas F20 Alpha TC1 live x86_64 starts as a gnome desktop with only 
> e-toys and a utility group of apps. There is no sugar.
> yum install @sugar-desktop does not install sugar.  This has been the 
> case for a while in nightly composes also.
>
> TC2 is just out and I am looking at it.

Same for f20 Alpha TC2:
http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/File:Soas-Alpha-TC2-x86_64.png
>
> Tom Gilliard
>> but according to Peter Robinson mail, not too much communication from 
>> that part.
>> From my part, I am building rpms for Australia, to use sugar 0.100 on 
>> a F18 image.
>> We will do testing on that, but not in the web part, at least not 
>> now, due to missing dependencies.
>>
>> Gonzalo
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Aug 28, 2013 at 2:43 PM, Daniel Narvaez <dwnarvaez at gmail.com 
>> <mailto:dwnarvaez at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     On 28 August 2013 19:33, Walter Bender <walter.bender at gmail.com
>>     <mailto:walter.bender at gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>         To me the issue is that we have no sense of the urgency of
>>         the 250
>>         bugs that have not been triaged. Most of the bugs that have been
>>         triaged are not urgent and should not hold up the release.
>>         (They can
>>         be tagged for 102 with little consequence.) But the great
>>         unknown is
>>         what scares me.
>>
>>
>>     There are those and there are the N bugs which has not been
>>     discovered because people are not testing... We can block
>>     rescheduling on completing the triage but can we block on someone
>>     doing the testing? This is totally a subjective feeling but my
>>     impression is that the worst bugs are unreported.
>>
>>     I was hoping to go towards continuous development gradually after
>>     0.100 but now I sort of feel forced into it because there are too
>>     many unknowns to put down a schedule.
>>
>>     _______________________________________________
>>     Sugar-devel mailing list
>>     Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>>     <mailto:Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org>
>>     http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Sugar-devel mailing list
>> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
>> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20130829/073b99d5/attachment-0001.html>