List:Packagers« Previous MessageNext Message »
From:Colin Charles Date:September 19 2007 8:51am
Subject:Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise source
View as plain text  
Jeremy Cole wrote:

Hi!

>> Yes, this has been brought up, and everything you've mentioned before 
>> has also been brought up. Our canned answer for this is that the 
>> internal server QA processes have improved tremendously, and there are 
>> many many test cases and an impressive test suite, hence MySQL has 
>> decided to try a "reverse Enterprise" model
> 
> Oh come on.  *Just today* another incident has caught my attention which 
> shows a lack of QA for basic things: 5.0.48 was pulled because of a 
> stupid bug which should have been caught in basic QA.  You may be ready 
> to call the community unnecessary for QA, but I am not.

As Joerg has mentioned before, not everyone agrees with this, and while 
I personally believe community QA is necessary, it seems that at the 
moment, the Enterprise team things otherwise

So no, I haven't written off community QA

</standard disclaimers apply, these are my opinions only>

-- 
Colin Charles, Community Relations Manager, APAC
MySQL AB, Melbourne, Australia, www.mysql.com
Mobile: +614 12 593 292 / Ekiga/Skype/Gizmo: colincharles
Web: http://www.bytebot.net/blog/

MySQL Forge: http://forge.mysql.com/
Thread
Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceRobin H. Johnson10 Sep
  • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceJoerg Bruehe10 Sep
    • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceRobin H. Johnson11 Sep
      • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceMichael Shigorin11 Sep
      • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceColin Charles18 Sep
        • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceMichael Shigorin18 Sep
        • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceJeremy Cole19 Sep
          • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceColin Charles19 Sep
          • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceJoerg Bruehe20 Sep
            • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceJeremy Cole20 Sep
              • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceJoerg Bruehe20 Sep
            • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceCristian Gafton21 Sep
        • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceRobin H. Johnson19 Sep
    • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceMichael Shigorin11 Sep
  • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceColin Charles18 Sep
    • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceRobin H. Johnson19 Sep
Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceJeremy Cole11 Sep
  • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceColin Charles18 Sep
    • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceMichael Shigorin18 Sep
      • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceColin Charles18 Sep
        • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceRobin H. Johnson19 Sep
        • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceMichael Shigorin19 Sep
    • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceJeremy Cole19 Sep
      • Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceColin Charles19 Sep
Re: Distro packaging decisions and the non-public Enterprise sourceCristian Gafton21 Sep