[mb-users] 'Release Candidate' server (was: "Edit All" - Is it problematic to understand?)

[Age Bosma]

Beth wrote:

>  
> For those users that weren't active during the testing phase, I think you
> should realize there were multiple instances of requests to test, and even
> highlighted comments of new server release coming, please test. (this was
> after a week or two of testing already) therefore, it should be accepted as
> a call to feedback that wasn't perhaps answered very constructively, not
> inappropriate time given to test the new server roll out.
> 
> I don't think many users like to test because either they don't find the
> problems (I didn't find many myself) or it's not live and therefore a "waste
> of time" or whatnot. I know I returned to test at least three different
> weeks to try and break the new server proposal and give comments, not
> relying on "things have been changed, come test again" type notes, just
> simply knowing it was an active shifting and changing environment, would be
> going live, and Stephan was asking anyone to point out what could be changed
> and what could be broken. There was an instance where someone said he would
> "cry" over all of the feedback on the mailing list. Yet he grabbed it and
> utilized it, changing where he could get good input. This is just what I was
> observing. 
> 

The 'waste of time' factor is somewhat true because there is already 
enough work that can be done in the live db.
Due to the complexity of the complete system it's difficult to try stuff 
as much as people would like to. There isn't a better test than a real 
life situation.
It was suggested before, but what about introducing a 'Release 
Candidate' version of the server where the actual changes are being made 
to the live db? This would allow people to do their normal thing with 
the ability to test the new server and provide feedback.

Yours,

Age (Prodoc)