Public SourceMage Discussion List

["Sergey A. Lipnevich" <sergey AT optimaltec.com>]

I have enough grounds to believe that quality lead job is to facilitate
bug discovery and call upon developers to fix those bugs, because
quality control people are usually not developers and control quality
indirectly. Here me out, I never thought you'd embark on path of fixing
problems by yourself, and I voted for you based not on your goals alone,
but also on the presumption that you'd collaborate with developers. I am
thinking now that I made a mistake.

Just so you appreciate the impact of Distrowatch, look at this:
http://wiki.sourcemage.org/index.php?action=find&find=distrowatch
Eight of our developers mention Distrowatch as a resource of
information, including our leader, and some came to SMGL via this site.
Whatever you think of it, don't dismiss its value even if you personally
don't see any.

And finally, I'd appreciate if you don't use profanity on the list.

Sergey.

On Thu, 2005-05-26 at 15:01 -0700, Seth Alan Woolley wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2005 at 05:26:42PM -0400, Sergey A. Lipnevich wrote:
> > Quoting Seth Alan Woolley <seth AT positivism.org>:
> > 
> > >In discussion during an admin meeting 50 stable bugs was the threshold
> > >of acceptability to participants for a 1.0 release.  70's really not
> > >that bad compared to where it was.
> > 
> > I should be attending more of those... It doesn't matter now, but fifty 
> > is 
> > way
> > too many. In regards to "where it was:" where it is now is below the radar
> > level on Distrowatch or anywhere else I know, so let's not use this as a
> > comparison.
> 
> Enough of this distrowatch bullshit.
> 
> 1) all this "hey go click distrowatch" is useless.
> 
> 2) ISO RELEASES ARE THE ONLY THING THAT GET SUBSTANTIAL DISTROWATCH 
> COVERAGE (unless you are gentoo).  Reviews maybe but let's not astroturf 
> reviews, please.  Front page profile turns into massive hits per day.  
> If you're so concerned, buy a distrowatch ad for us.
> 
> 3) distrowatch because of rule (2) is the dumbest thing in the world.  
> It's geared toward binary distros (unless you are gentoo).
> 
> I've only had a few weeks to reduce bug counts.  Everybody's partly 
> responsible for this and if people write buggy code, buggy code will hit 
> stable unless you never want people to see another stable grimoire 
> release ever again.  Remember, we can shift benchmarks and goals at any 
> time.  They aren't set by a baron from above.
> 
> Regarding (2) again, specifically the next ISO, a lot of improvement has 
> happened that is behind the scenes on the ability to make a reproducible 
> ISO.  We've learned a lot on this road, and I think we're pretty soon 
> going to hit critical mass, but we need a solid 1.0 release for that.  
> I'm doing everything I can to get us there, but part of going somewhere 
> is knowing where you are.