Page 1 of 1

Beta policy, or the lack thereof

Posted: Mon Dec 07, 2015 9:02 pm
by Franck
Hello,

I was wondering why there is no beta version everytime a new version (with new features, like the 2.1) to test by users?

For the version 2.0, I had the chance to test it quite early and find several bugs & propose UX suggestions. So could it be possible to release beta versions in a regular cycle?

Thank you.

Re: Beta policy, or the lack thereof

Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2015 1:06 pm
by pierrepercee
This would also facilitate the work of developers. Test phases is very time-consuming but does not require very specific skills. If some users may have the chance to test the latest versions, this will probably also prevent small forgotten details that lead to publish a bug fix release very quickly.

Re: Beta policy, or the lack thereof

Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2015 4:13 pm
by DIGI3
We have tried public betas in the past with mixed results, but I think it may be time we revisited them again.

The Dev Team will be discussing ideas at the next meeting. It may be the creation of a Testing Team, or some other method of release that's less than fully public.

Thanks for the input!

Re: Beta policy, or the lack thereof

Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2015 4:16 pm
by Franck
Thanks for your answer. A testing team could be a good idea, indeed. Wait and see then. :)

Re: Beta policy, or the lack thereof

Posted: Tue Dec 08, 2015 5:51 pm
by jce76350
It may be the creation of a Testing Team
There is already QA group in the dev team ;)
Best Way is a daily snapshots for all.

Re: Beta policy, or the lack thereof

Posted: Wed Dec 09, 2015 8:28 am
by tristan
I would vote in favour of beta releases/daily snapshots as well. The bug with locking in the recent 2.1 release is a perfect example. This could've been caught very easily with a beta release.

This could also work perfectly for module releases by the way. The small bug in the Self Registration module being a good example. Kindly fixed by Robert back in October on his private svn but only released to the public in December but introducing a bigger problem along the way.

Maybe the QA group could use some extra help?