Am Sonntag 22 März 2009 15:28:28 schrieb Billie Erin Walsh:
> James Richard Tyrer wrote:
> > Samuel Kage wrote:
> >> Maybe you are right about the blanket statements. But I'm no hacker.
> >
> > Please don't become a hacker. :-) but rather, you can become a
> > programmer/developer/engineer. You don't need to go to engineering
> > college like I did. However, reading books isn't enough, you really
> > need a mentor to "grade" your work.
> >
> >> So I can't write code. All I know I can do is writing bug reports
> >> (Which I already do) and say what I think to animate people to
> >> reconsider some things (What I've tried with the first post). But if
> >> a bug report has to be written, it is already to late in a way (Hope
> >> you see what I mean). That applies only for major releases and for
> >> obvious bugs of course.
> >
> > Yes, I hear you, I understand, and I agree. Bug reports should not take
> > the place of basic TQM testing (quality control) by the person or team
> > that wrote the code. You are correct that it should not be necessary to
> > file bug reports for obvious defects. Bug reports should be for those
> > obscure cases that most people won't find, and which, for the same
> > reasons, testing will not usually find.
> >
> > We appear to be building software the way that Detroit used to build
> > cars. They would build the whole care and then the inspectors would
> > look at the car and try to find what was wrong with it and fix it. They
> > don't build cars that way anymore. TQM and the ideas of William Edwards
> > Deming are now the way of almost all manufacturing. His ideas and TQM
> > can be applied to software as well. The thing is that not only does
> > this result in better quality but it is less work to do it that way.
> > Less work to prevent the bugs from entering the code base than to go
> > back later and try to fix them later. And, to repeat myself, bug free
> > software starts with good design.
>
> OK, let me say up front that I am _NOT_ a power user [ just wanted to
> get that out of the way ].
>
> However, as just an everyday home user KDE 4.x.x may not be "perfect"
> yet but it is getting better _FAST_.
>
> While I wasn't around when KDE 3.0 first came out I hear that it wasn't
> so hot either. A lot of gnashing of teeth and growling was supposed to
> have been heard all through the KDE User Nation. By the time I came
> along about KDE 3.4/3.5 it was great. Everyone _LOVED_ 3.5.x. Now that
> KDE 4 is here, once again a lot gnashing of teeth and growling is heard
> all through the KDE User Nation.
>
> There is _NO_ way on Gods Green Earth that a developer can test in every
> possible situation. They might have a couple different machines they
> test on but there are users out here with combinations that boggle the
> imagination. Then throw in all the possible software combinations and
> the possibilities skyrocket off the chart. In many ways everyday users
> _ARE_ the testers. We just need to get used to that idea.
>
> While I'm not a big fan of change just for the sake of change, the only
> constant in the universe is change. What say we all just settle down and
> let it get fixed. If there's a bug that warrants it post a bug report.
> If you find a workaround, post that. All this gnashing of teeth stuff
> doesn't really help a lot.
>
> I honestly feel like the developers are doing a pretty darned good job.
> Lets just help them do it.
>
> Besides. Just think, you could have paid a couple hundred dollars and
> gotten something MUCH worse.
Please read the previous posts first. It is all about obvious bugs. Bugs that
you sometimes see at first glance after booting your pc. Or bugs that are
appearing in common use cases with common hardware. But not bugs that don't
matter because 99% of the users won't ever see them.
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
