[Lazarus] Release schedule and policy

Alexander Klenin klenin at gmail.com
Mon Oct 25 17:27:04 CEST 2010


On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 00:28, Florian Klaempfl <florian at freepascal.org> wrote:
> Am 25.10.2010 13:19, schrieb Alexander Klenin:
>
>> to the current FPC one:
>
> [...]
>
>> Perl porters managed to overcome most of the problems
>> (except, of course, language competition)
>> and seriously invigorate Perl development by
>> 1) Streamlining release process, so a single person
>>   can do a release in a single day.
>
> Ok, then we need first some sponsors for hardware :) We're releasing
> binary releases and not only a blob of source code. Then we need
> somebody with deep knowledge about windows, all unixes, OS/2, DOS etc.
> Further, he needs to know all unix package systems and is able to fix
> errors in all the different installer information files from inno setup
> to the home made DOS installer.

I think you overrate importance of synchronized binary release
for all platforms. I thin kit is ok to postpone release of
binary packages for exotic and outdated architectures.

>> It should be noted that FPC problems are worsened
>> by the lack of tests,
>
> Really? What do you miss in the compiler testsuite?

First of all, I miss structure ;-)
Is there any way to check if some feature is covered by a test?
For example, I would like to know if there is a test
covering object initialization bug discussed yesterday --
how do I proceed?
Secondly, it seems that some tests are under-checking,
especially those in tbs and tbf directories.
tbf test check only the fact that compiler fails,
not caring if it fails with the correct error message.
Even worse, tbs tests check only that the compilation
succeeds, not caring if it produces correct result.

-- 
Alexander S. Klenin




More information about the Lazarus mailing list