[PC-BSD Testing] Alpha/Beta Testing Checklist

Fabrizio Parrella fabrizio at bibivu.com
Thu Mar 19 06:20:18 PDT 2009

There should be a checklist for each "reality"...

for example, in my company, to be able to use PC-BSD, we need to have very 
few things working properly and fast, and those are not in your list.  You 
may include them, but I bet there are other companies people that have 
different needs and even if you try to include them all, they will never be 

BTW, In case you want to include mine:
 - printing from FF3 with multiple printers (almost fixed - Kris has a good 
 - date/time in Thunderbird
 - Send file via email from OpenOffice
 - Dual monitor support for non nvidia
 - easy mount of samba drives in a way that each user have their own mounts 
(right now I am mounting via fstab)
 - ability to open standard files with a click from browsers (for example 
PDF from FF)

 - for future:  thinClient that only uses login, home, and programs on 
remote and everything else is local


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Arthur Koziol" <A-Koziol at neiu.edu>
To: "PC-BSD Testing list" <testing at lists.pcbsd.org>
Sent: Thursday, March 19, 2009 8:42 AM
Subject: Re: [PC-BSD Testing] Alpha/Beta Testing Checklist

>>Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64It probably is a good idea, but no
>>offense intended Ian, I used to
>>test extensively for Symantec a few years back and they used a
>>checklist approach. Personally, I hated it because it got testers so
>>focussed on the list that they ended up just doing just the list. The
>>most interesting bugs were rarely found by the testers who followed
>>the list.   :-)
>>Actually, it would work OK as long as we didn't insist that everybody
>>do that. Being retired I don't have the patience to follow a checklist
>>anymore. Besides, it is always nice to have people who come in and
>>turn on the computer and think I wonder what the hell would happen if
>>I tried this...  Just my two cents worth, but how about just putting
>>it forth as a set of guidelines instead of a checklist. the difference
>>is more a bit of semantics than anything, but I do better with
>>guidelines than I do with checklists.   :-)
> Bill,
> I see what you mean with the checklist. You do run the risk of missing the
> forest for the trees in a way. At the risk of confusing people who
> are Joe / Jane
> average user, would it be dumb to have two lists: one for the beta testers
> and one that's just plain vanilla that is sort of the Anti-checklist?
> I wouldn't mind
> the "long form" if it's function is to check for bugs and errors from
> a compatibility
> and techie standpoint. A plain vanilla list could encompass the 
> touchy-feely
> and usability aspect.
> Arthur
> _______________________________________________
> Testing mailing list
> Testing at lists.pcbsd.org
> http://lists.pcbsd.org/mailman/listinfo/testing

More information about the Testing mailing list