Highway of Life wrote:
code reader wrote:
a bug-free code is as close to oxymoron as you can get.
Darn you! Ecto! You beat me too
in addition to the bug in the code (missing newline) you have a bug in the documentations (painted).
on a more serious note:
it really does seem that the testers were slacking (we are doing slightly better now). between the release of beta-2 and the release of beta-3 there were roughly 3 months, but in the last half of this period bug reports have slowed down to a trickle, and, as far as i could tell, most of the serious bug reports were made using the development ("cvs") version rather than the beta itself.
i am not sure what conclusion one could draw from this observation, but my view is that it means more and shorter beta-cycles would have worked better.
i think it would be best if the developers will release a new beta as soon as the amount and quality of bug reports begin to diminish, especially if the more serious reports relate to the development code rather than the beta package.
and to us, testers i say: if you want to see this thing out as quickly and as cleanly as possible, test, test and test.
try to do stupid things, and see that the system is robust in spotting the user's mistakes, and is giving reasonable error messages. try to do complex things. validate the pages using validation tools. read the text messages, looking for misspells, discrepancies, ambiguous phrasing, and plain old mistakes.
when you write bug reports, make sure you give clear and sufficient reproduction direction. test it in different environment.
when a developer closes a bug you reported with a "fixed", try to load the new code and verify the fix.
etc. etc. etc.
looking at the bug tracker and cheering every time the number goes down is counter productive. our goal should be to fill the thing as much as we can, while the developer's goal is to empty it as fast as they
can. low numbers on the tracker only means we don't do our part as well as we should.
just my 2c.