Version 5 (modified by 14 years ago) (diff) | ,
---|
Development/testing issues
Beaker test framework
Should we start configuring a dedicated testing framework for OpenVPN? This idea will be presented by mattock.
- Rationale
- Would allow testing that OpenVPN works on a large number of predefined platforms and configurations
- Replaces part of the manual testing effort by testing the external behavior of the application automatically
- Would allow spotting bugs early
- Limitations
- Only tests for external behavior of the application
- Does not replace human testing for those classes problems which are difficult/impossible to test programmatically.
Continuous integration server
Should we build a continuous integration / automated release management server? This idea will be presented by mattock.
- Rationale
- Would allow spotting build problems early on by building "allmerged" and reporting developers of build problems
- Would reduce developer frustration
- Would allow automated packaging of openvpn-testing for various platforms and publishing those on a web server
- The above would translate to increased use of openvpn-testing, leading to earlier bug reports and would thus make the release process (new code -> acceptance to testing -> acceptance to stable -> release) faster
- Could also allow centralized automated searching of code problems
- Limitations
- Does not replace human testing
- Only tests the build process (and possibly code problems)
Developer bounties
Should we have a bounty system for writing missing features? This idea will be presented by ecrist.
- Would allow users to prioritize feature additions through compensation.
- Would help achieve greater interest of developers in users' requests and needs.
- Bounty funds would be setup and maintained by a non-developer (ecrist?) and held. This assures payment upon completion and assures feature is completed before bounty is paid.
- Multiple users could fund a bounty for intensive feature additions which may warrant higher payouts.