MM _ wrote:
> Hey guys,
> 
> I think we should get our CallWeaver page back on wikipedia, but probably 
> wait till
> 1.2.0 is released so we dont run into the same problems.
> 
> There's only 9 open tickets (one is mine, I know), does anyone know what the 
> holdup
> is and a rough ETA of having them closed?
> 
> mm_202.
> 

hello,

I.

wikipedia is a questionable information source anyway, too much non-neutral, 
pure commercials and completely wrong stuff 
in there to find. the editing regulations are far too interpretation depending. 
no one should rely on it for anything.
most entertaining are the poltitics and history articles ;) it is not more than 
a "nice try" to provide information. notably seen, too much 
normal users without education in information science tend to rely on it for 
"authentic information", only because of its 
popularity thats not so good. even google is a better source to learn deciding 
about good information sources.

II.

the 9 tickets do not cover possible regression of new features and 
the 9 defects are taken over by 2 devs only, other devs seem not 
to document the (self found?) bugs they fix, see
http://www.callweaver.org/changesets
so estimation based on the bugtracker only should be at high risk.

estimation for 1.2.0 rel. based on

1. http://www.callweaver.org/browse/callweaver/tags delta times history.
2. the still standing staff people resources issue (more contributors/staff 
requested publicly lately).
3. not doing software metrics and low on professional QA/QM- people (as usual 
in free SW projects).
4. unknown/unestimated users (testers) amount base, acceptance in my country 
for CW still insignificant. 
5. missing deadline milestone "motivative" time targets setting by maintainers, 
milestones resolution maybe too low.
6. many contributors working for other projects, too, cant easily estimate 
their resources for CW (I'm still busy with my own ekiga/opal  
network desaster and broken DNS, and I have introduced at least 1 yet unknown 
defect by removing a n+101 jump).
7. insufficent marketing and hard acceptance competition vs. * 1.4 and digium, 
several notable counter-marketing attacks.
8. unknown/uncoordinated fault-preventing software 
analysis-before-implementation methods used by devs.
9. QM/QA/CM-cycle not yet closed due to minor official pre-release delivery to 
Linux distros (CM-integrators).
10. non-linear growing effort in short of and short after the major release due 
to above and other practices not yet introduced.
...

not under +6M, motivation target should be set to +4M for 1.2.0 milestone.
as I can see, it has already been decided not to introduce RC5-9.

correction and completition welcome, maintaners should act upon resonable.

y
tom

_______________________________________________
Callweaver-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.callweaver.org/mailman/listinfo/callweaver-dev

Reply via email to