Public SourceMage Discussion List

[Pieter Lenaerts <e-type AT sourcemage.org>]

Op do, 13-04-2006 te 00:31 +0200, schreef Arwed von Merkatz:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2006 at 05:04:13PM -0500, Jeremy Blosser (emrys) wrote:
> [...] 

> The evaluation should be done very objectively. Document all special
> cases, weirdness or plain errors you run into, including (if available)
> workarounds. Overall the data gathered during the evaluation could be
> very useful for the future grimoire guru documentation, so keep that in
> mind :)

We need a template to report the gathered data in. It's impossible to
compare the different tools the way we've been reporting until now
because you can't counter a flaw in A with a an unrelated strength in B.

What we need:
1) A list of must have features
2) A list of grimoire operations for p4 and the operations for ${TOOL}
3) A description of the central servers organisation
4) A description of external tools for ${TOOL}
5) A section for comments on ${TOOL} that don't fit in 1),2),3) or 4)

optionally: 6) A section with the persons testing ${TOOL} and changes
and comments for the report document

-- 
Pieter Lenaerts
Source Mage GNU/Linux

http://www.sourcemage.org
"Linux so advanced it may well be magic"

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dit berichtdeel is digitaal ondertekend