Hi Jeremy, all !
Jeremy Cole wrote:
> Hi Colin,
>> 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.
We all (at MySQL AB) agree with your assessment:
This should not have passed internal tests undetected, and the incident
showed the test suite lacks coverage.
> You may be ready
> to call the community unnecessary for QA, but I am not.
That is a debatable issue, depending on which kind of QA you mean.
IMO, it would be a shame if MySQL AB would try to use the community for
such basic QA - things like that InnoDB "order by ... desc" problem must
be covered (and caught) by our internal processes.
So IMO, MySQL AB must not rely on the community for such basic things.
What MySQL AB can not do internally is to imitate the wide variety of
usage and access patterns, database designs, applications, connectors,
heterogeneous environments, etc which are developed and used by the many
MySQL AB relies on the community for extended QA (for lack of a better
term), and we are grateful to everybody doing this and providing us
feedback (positive or negative).
Joerg Bruehe, Senior Production Engineer
MySQL AB, www.mysql.com