Newsgroups Main » Newsgroups Directory » Computers – Non-OS » Source code

Testers ( comp.sources.testers )
spacer NewsDemon Usenet 2021 Access
 
From [email protected] Sat May 23 13:05:45 1992 Xref: uunet news.announce.newgroups:2372 news.groups:51586 comp.sources.d:7834 Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,comp.sources.d Path: uunet!bounce-back From: [email protected] (Kent Landfield) Subject: RFD:  comp.sources.testers Message-ID: <[email protected]> Followup-To: news.groups Summary: Lets improve the underlying beta test support on the net Keywords:  beta, testing, portability Sender: [email protected] (David C Lawrence) Organization: Sterling Software Date: Sat, 23 May 1992 16:58:01 GMT Approved: [email protected] Lines: 54  Name:    comp.sources.testers Status:  unmoderated  This is a call for discussion for an unmoderated group to match software packages with people willing to test the packages. In several ways comp.sources.testers will be the opposite of comp.sources.wanted: in the latter, people who want a program try to find people who have that software, and in the former, it's the other way around. No source will ever be posted to comp.sources.testers. Most of the subject lines should look like     Subject: Need beta testers for ppmtovcr, another portable bitmap converter  or perhaps final announcements like     Subject: Done with gamma testing for ppmtovcr, posted to c.s.misc  along with acknowledgments. comp.sources.testers can work as a first stage before posting to any of the source groups, including alt.sources, comp.sources.unix, comp.sources.misc, comp.sources.games, the various machine-specific source groups, and even comp.sources.reviewed. Crossposts into comp.sources.testers are fine when there's an appropriate subject group. Topics like     Subject: What metrics do you use for evaluating object-oriented programs?  belong in comp.software-eng, not comp.sources.testers.  Just in case, a few definitions:     alpha testing: Software in alpha test is more an expression of an    idea than a usable product. The interface will change, the internals    will change, the documentation may be skimpy. Alpha testers complain.    Often a program survives alpha testing only because its programmer    can browbeat a few close friends into trying it out.     beta testing: Software in beta test includes most or all of the    features which the author thinks it needs. In other words, the    interface is usable. On the other hand, the package hasn't been    tested thoroughly and probably has quite a few bugs. Beta testers try    to use the software as they would use the finished product, and    report on what goes wrong and what major features they think have    been left out. This is usually the longest stage of testing.     gamma testing: Software in gamma test works. Sure, there might be a    few bugs here and there, but hopefuly nothing more than an annoyance.    Gamma testers point out portability enhancements, small or large bugs    but never critical problems, extra useful features they'd like to    see. This stage is often left out, especially in commercial packages    where getting something out the door is more important than adding    the extra touches which are going to appear in the next version    anyway. However, for software distributed as source, gamma testing    can make the difference between a program that works and a program    that works on dozens of platforms.  From [email protected] Tue Jul 28 17:18:38 1992 Xref: uunet news.announce.newgroups:2569 news.groups:54749 comp.sources.d:8012 alt.sources.d:3245 Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,comp.sources.d,alt.sources.d Path: uunet!bounce-back From: [email protected] (Kent Landfield) Subject: CFV: comp.sources.testers Message-ID: <[email protected]> Followup-To: poster Summary: Let's improve the underlying beta test support on the net X-Md4-Signature: 2c297a5ffec296e797d3371974bdcdfc Keywords:  beta, testing, portability Sender: [email protected] (David C Lawrence) Reply-To: [email protected] Organization: Sterling Software Date: Tue, 28 Jul 1992 18:25:18 GMT Approved: [email protected] Lines: 69  This is the first call for votes for an unmoderated group to match software  packages with people willing to test the packages.  The RFD was published  approximately two months ago, and the discussion surrounding the group's  creation were generally positive.  Time to put it to a vote.  NAME:     comp.sources.testers  STATUS:       unmoderated  CHARTER:    The purpose of this newsgroup is to give authors of software packages a place   to post in hopes of finding people willing to test their packages.  No source    will ever be posted to comp.sources.testers.  comp.sources.testers can work    as a first stage before posting to any of the source groups, including    alt.sources, comp.sources.unix, comp.sources.misc, comp.sources.games, the    various machine specific source groups, and even comp.sources.reviewed.     Most of the subject lines should look like      Subject: Need beta testers for ppmtovcr, another portable bitmap converter    or perhaps final announcements like      Subject: Done with gamma testing for ppmtovcr, posted to c.s.misc    along with acknowledgments. Crossposts into comp.sources.testers are fine    when there's an appropriate subject group. Topics like       Subject: What metrics do you use for evaluating object-oriented programs?    belong in comp.software-eng, not comp.sources.testers.   VOTING PROCEDURE:    Send votes to: [email protected]   or   uunet!sparky!votes    Preferably your message should include one of the following lines   in the body of the text:        I vote YES for comp.sources.testers       I vote NO for comp.sources.testers    I will be flexible in accepting other wording providing your vote    is made clear and unambiguous.  If I receive more than one vote   from the same account;      o If the votes are for the same side of the issue, I will       count the votes as one vote. I will send email informing       the voter that their vote is only being counted once.      o If the votes are for opposite sides of the issue, I will       throw out both votes. I will send email informing the       voter that their vote is being discounted in this case.    The voting period ends at 00:00 EDT on Thursday, Aug 20, 1992. In order   for your vote to be counted I must receive it before then.  COMMENTS:      The guidelines for successful creation of a new newsgroup require   that the vote taker receive 100 more YES votes than NO votes, and that   the YES votes be at least 2/3 of all valid votes cast. I will send a    mass acknowledgement of votes received approximately half way through   the voting period.  			-Kent+  From [email protected] Mon Aug 24 22:22:45 1992 Xref: uunet news.announce.newgroups:2646 news.groups:55739 comp.sources.d:8087 alt.sources.d:3330 Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,comp.sources.d,alt.sources.d Path: uunet!bounce-back From: [email protected] (Kent Landfield) Subject: RESULT: comp.sources.testers passes 120:17 Message-ID: <[email protected]> Followup-To: news.groups Sender: [email protected] (David C Lawrence) Organization: Sterling Software Date: Mon, 24 Aug 1992 22:37:32 GMT Approved: [email protected] Lines: 190  The vote for the unmoderated group comp.sources.testers is over.  The group  passed 120 YES votes to 17 NO votes.  The guidelines for successful creation  of a new newsgroup require that the votetaker receive 100 more YES votes than  NO votes, and that the YES votes be at least 2/3 of all valid votes cast.   There will now be a 5 day waiting period during which time you will have a  chance to correct any errors in the list of votes received.  If, after the  waiting period, there were no serious objections that might invalidate the  vote, the newgroup message will be sent out by the news.announce.newgroups  moderator.  This was a close vote so please take the time to assure there was no error.  If there was an error, send mail to [email protected]  Thanks to all who participated in the vote.  CHARTER:    The purpose of this newsgroup is to give authors of software packages a    place to post in hopes of finding people willing to test their packages.     No source will ever be posted to comp.sources.testers.  c.s.testers can    work as a first stage before posting to any of the source groups, including    alt.sources, comp.sources.unix, comp.sources.misc, comp.sources.games, the    various machine specific source groups, and even comp.sources.reviewed.     Most of the subject lines should look like      Subject: Need beta testers for ppmtovcr, another portable bitmap converter    or perhaps final announcements like      Subject: Done with gamma testing for ppmtovcr, posted to c.s.misc    along with acknowledgments. Crossposts into comp.sources.testers are fine    when there's an appropriate subject group. Topics like       Subject: What metrics do you use for evaluating object-oriented programs?    belong in comp.software-eng, not comp.sources.testers.   ############################################## # YES Votes Received for comp.sources.testers # #  Received 120 Yes votes # Adam Bryant             - [email protected] Aditya Palande          - [email protected] Adrian Wontroba         - [email protected] Alan P Barrett          - [email protected] Andrew Herbert          - [email protected] Andy Finkenstadt        - [email protected] Bengt Larsson           - [email protected] Bengt Martensson        - [email protected] Beth Schwindt           - [email protected] Bill Bogstad            - [email protected] Bjoern Stabell          - [email protected] Bjorn Knutsson          - [email protected] Bo Kullmar              - [email protected]  Brandon S. Allbery      - [email protected] Brian Eck               - [email protected] Carl Edman              - [email protected] Carl J Lydick           - [email protected] Carsten Grammes         - [email protected] Charles Carvalho        - [email protected] Charlie Towne           - [email protected] Chip Salzenberg         - [email protected] Chris Lewis             - [email protected] Christoph Weber-Fahr    - [email protected] Christopher Samuel      - [email protected] Colin Bell              - [email protected] Dan Bernstein           - [email protected] Dan Jacobson            - [email protected] DaviD W. Sanderson      - [email protected] David Buscher           - [email protected] David Dick              - [email protected] David H. Brierley       - [email protected] David Hendrix           - [email protected] David Hobley            - [email protected] David Partain           - [email protected] David Raz               - [email protected] David Wald              - [email protected] David Wilkinson         - [email protected] Diab Jerius             - [email protected] Dmitry S. Kohmanyuk     - [email protected] Ed McGuire              - [email protected] Eric A. Litman          - [email protected] Eric Hunt               - [email protected] Franck LATREMOLIERE     - [email protected] Frank Nusselder         - [email protected] Frank Seitz             - [email protected] Geoff C. Wing           - [email protected] Gerald Allen Kalafut    - [email protected] Gregory G. Woodbury     - [email protected] Hans Trompert           - [email protected] Heiko Schlichting       - [email protected] Jack Bailey             - [email protected] Jamie Gritton           - [email protected] Jan Dj{rv               - [email protected] Jay Maynard             - [email protected] Jayesh Thakrar          - [email protected] Jens Kjerte             - [email protected] Jesse Buckley           - [email protected] Jim Ault                - [email protected] Jim Davis               - [email protected] Jim Meyering            - [email protected] Joe Hartley             - [email protected] Joe Keane               - [email protected] Joel Rosi-Schwartz      - root%[email protected] John Harkin             - [email protected] John Martin             - [email protected] John R. Dennison        - [email protected] Jon Brinkmann           - [email protected] Jonathan I. Kamens      - [email protected] Juergen Nickelsen       - [email protected] Keith WACLENA           - [email protected] Ken Pizzini             - [email protected] Kenn "Jazz" Booth II    - [email protected] Kent Landfield          - uunet!kent Kevin Braunsdorf        - [email protected] Kevin W. Reed           - [email protected] Kim DeVaughn            - [email protected] Kjetil Torgrim Homme    - [email protected] Lars Wirzenius          - [email protected] Len Charest             - [email protected] Linda M. Fitzpatrick    - [email protected] Malcolm Mladenovic      - [email protected] Mark "Crimson" Friedman - [email protected] Mark Delany             - [email protected] Marshall Midden         - [email protected] Matthias Urlichs        - [email protected] Mustafa Soysal          - [email protected] Nick Holloway           - [email protected] Olaf Klein              - [email protected] Patrick Schaaf          - [email protected] Pete Bevin              - [email protected] Pierre Uszynski         - [email protected] Raj Manandhar           - [email protected] Randy J Ray             - [email protected] Richard A. Golding      - [email protected] Rick Ellis              - [email protected] Rod Whitby              - [email protected] Roland Kaltefleiter     - [email protected] Roland Schock           - [email protected] Russell Schulz          - [email protected] Sascha Wildner          - [email protected] Sean Casey              - [email protected] Stefan Linnemann        - [email protected] Steve Simmons           - [email protected] Stig Rune Kristoffersen - [email protected] Tak                     - [email protected] Thomas Koenig           - [email protected] Thorsten Kitz           - [email protected] Tim Ramsey              - [email protected] Timothy Shimeall        - [email protected] Tod B Bussert           - [email protected] Tom Lane                - [email protected] Tomoharu Takeuchi       - [email protected] William E Davidsen      - [email protected] William Moxley          - [email protected] William Welch           - [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] ############################################## # NO Votes Received for comp.sources.testers # #  Received 17 No votes # Carl Rigney             - [email protected] Chip Rosenthal          - [email protected] Christian Finger        - [email protected] Cliff Tuel              - [email protected]  David Barr              - [email protected] Irving Wolfe            - [email protected] John F. Haugh II        - [email protected] Marc Moorcroft          - [email protected] Patrick Tufts           - [email protected] Paul Eggert             - [email protected] Pete Akerson            - [email protected]  Rich Salz               - [email protected] Richard H. Miller       - [email protected]  Richard Kulawiec        - [email protected] Sean Eric Fagan         - [email protected] Steve Rogers            - [email protected]  Todd Cooper             - uvmark!todd%[email protected] --  Kent Landfield                   INTERNET: [email protected] Sterling Software, IMD           UUCP:     uunet!sparky!kent Phone:    (402) 291-8300         FAX:      (402) 291-4362 Please send comp.sources.misc-related mail to [email protected]  From [email protected] Mon Sep 11 20:58:57 1995 Xref: rpi news.announce.newgroups:1305 news.groups:29162 comp.sources.d:4155 Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,comp.sources.d Path: rpi!bounce-back From: [email protected] (Dan Bernstein) Subject: RFD:  comp.sources.testers Followup-To: news.groups Sender: [email protected] Nntp-Posting-Host: cs.rpi.edu Date: 29 Jul 91 03:19:26 GMT Approved: [email protected] Lines: 53 Status: RO X-Status:   This is a call for discussion for an unmoderated group to match software packages with people willing to test the packages. In several ways comp.sources.testers will be the opposite of comp.sources.wanted: in the latter, people who want a program try to find people who have that software, and in the former, it's the other way around. No source will ever be posted to comp.sources.testers. Most of the subject lines should look like     Subject: Need beta testers for ppmtovcr, another portable bitmap converter  or perhaps final announcements like     Subject: Done with gamma testing for ppmtovcr, posted to c.s.misc  along with acknowledgments. comp.sources.testers can work as a first stage before posting to any of the source groups, including alt.sources, comp.sources.unix, comp.sources.misc, comp.sources.games, the various machine-specific source groups, and even comp.sources.reviewed. Crossposts into comp.sources.testers are fine when there's an appropriate subject group. Topics like     Subject: What metrics do you use for evaluating object-oriented programs?  belong in comp.software-eng, not comp.sources.testers.  Just in case, a few definitions:     alpha testing: Software in alpha test is more an expression of an    idea than a usable product. The interface will change, the internals    will change, the documentation may be skimpy. Alpha testers complain.    Often a program survives alpha testing only because its programmer    can browbeat a few close friends into trying it out.     beta testing: Software in beta test includes most or all of the    features which the author thinks it needs. In other words, the    interface is usable. On the other hand, the package hasn't been    tested thoroughly and probably has quite a few bugs. Beta testers try    to use the software as they would use the finished product, and    report on what goes wrong and what major features they think have    been left out. This is usually the longest stage of testing.     gamma testing: Software in gamma test works. Sure, there might be a    few bugs here and there, but hopefuly nothing more than an annoyance.    Gamma testers point out portability enhancements, small or large bugs    but never critical problems, extra useful features they'd like to    see. This stage is often left out, especially in commercial packages    where getting something out the door is more important than adding    the extra touches which are going to appear in the next version    anyway. However, for software distributed as source, gamma testing    can make the difference between a program that works and a program    that works on dozens of platforms.  ---Dan  
 
USENET FACT: Flaming
Flaming is the hostile interaction between multiple Usenet users.
 
Menu