Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO spell installation method (Was: [Private mail]Cauldron Team Email Meeting)

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Eric Sandall <eric AT sandall.us>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] ISO spell installation method (Was: [Private mail]Cauldron Team Email Meeting)
  • Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 18:04:48 -0700

Quoting Andrew <afrayedknot AT thefrayedknot.armory.com>:
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 at 05:32:26PM -0700, Eric Sandall wrote:
<snip>
I think he's mainly talking about the first point: Easy to identify the
offending code and fix it. The other goal (new ISO in a timeley
fashion) is more geared towards our goal of automating the ISO creation
process.

I think they're both necessary ingredients to satisfy "easy to fix and
update" requirement, no matter how fast you can fix the bug in the code
it doesnt matter until theres an iso with the code on it (we tend to
ignore that part in our contituents, since its relatively automatic) on
the other hand, if it takes you very little time to release an iso but
the code is a nightmare, you have the same result. The question is, are
they both long term goals? short term goals? one is long the other short?
If they're both short term goals, how does that effect the near term schedule?

I believe they're both short-term goals, at least currently, with the
ISO automation being higher priority than the modularization for these
reasons:
1) Faster ISO creation/release means we can verify our bugs are fixed
faster
2) Faster ISO creation/release means we can try new features/ideas
faster
3) Faster ISO creation/release means that if we don't like a
feature/idea/fix that went in it's easy to generate a new ISO with a
better one
4) Once the modularization is "done" it'll now be easy to generate an
ISO with the new menu, and if it didn't quite work, fix and release a
new one.

A faster ISO creation/release method will mean faster fixes and an
easier time testing any changes we think the ISO needs, IMO.

<snip>
Perhaps call a meeting to scrub through all the bugs? Or just have david
go through them and ask people to change if they disagree.

I like the latter idea as that tends to get more responses from our
crew. :) It also takes less overall time.

-sandalle

--
Eric Sandall | Source Mage GNU/Linux Developer
eric at sandall.us PGP: 0xA8EFDD61 | http://www.sourcemage.org/
http://eric.sandall.us/ | SysAdmin @ Inst. Shock Physics @
WSU
http://counter.li.org/ #196285 | http://www.shock.wsu.edu/

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page