On 2010-01-04 at 00:01:33 [+0100], Ingo Weinhold <ingo_weinhold@xxxxxx> wrote: > > On 2010-01-03 at 18:34:51 [+0100], Stephan Assmus <superstippi@xxxxxx> > wrote: [...] > > As long as the developers are not working faster than the existing > > high-quality testers, there is no point in extending the QA process. > > I certainly don't want to belittle the effort of the existing testers, > but a well-organized QA will definitely help to improve the overall > ticket quality and tracking of bugs. This will actually help the > developers, rather than just flood them with more tickets as you seem to > suggest. Someone has to do that work of course (coming up with a well organized QA). I don't want to keep anyone from doing that, although a discussion will alays take up resources of course. The reason why I am hesitant toward the idea is that I see plenty of tickets that are perfectly suitable as they are to explain a lot of bugs in Haiku. A very little amount of tickets fails to describe a problem in enough detail that anyone, given the time and motivation, couldn't figure out the bug from the ticket. Another very small amount of tickets requires to repeat information previously given elsewhere. I don't think these problems are inherint to the system we use. Again - how exactly will a better QA process bring immediate benefit to the project, if we fail to draw the big potential benefit out of the process we alreay have? By big potential benefit I mean that Haiku would already be so much more polished if a big chunk of all existing tickets were fixed right now. The main problems are lack of time and/or motivation. How will a better QA process help with that? More likely (IMHO), it has the potential to cause even more frustration when tickets just linger if the one who prepared it put even more effort into it. Best regards, -Stephan