On Tue, 24 Sep 2002, Davis, Todd C wrote:
> How are patches like this and other changes to PCP tested and verified to be
> correct? I think enterprise class system utilities like PCP require a much
> higher level of qualify assurance than the typical open source project. ...
Agreed. I think Mark has responded to this, but I'd like to add ...
- for about 6 years before we made the open source release, PCP was a
successful production-hardened proprietary product deployed on varied
and some very large (500+ CPUs, multi-Tb memory, 10's of Tb of disk,
...) systems, so we are very QA-sensitive.
- the PCP QA infrastructure grew with PCP, it is not an after thought
- we use common source code internally to generate both the proprietary and
the open source versions, so we have a vested interest in quality that
extends beyond the open source code base
- as all those who've worked with me on PCP will attest, I'm inclined to
be obsessive about QA!
> ... What
> verification procedures does SGI go through before making a source tarball
> release? I think test suites should be made available to developers to use
> when making enhancements and bug fixes so changes can be verified. Tests
> could also be submitted with any enhancements before being accepted by the
> PCP project. Test suites can also be useful in verifying an installation of
> PCP.
I posted a detailed response on this topic earlier today.
|