Author: Shep
Date: 05:53:06 09/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 28, 1999 at 00:56:39, James Robertson wrote: >On September 27, 1999 at 21:23:39, Nicolas Carrasco wrote: > >>When I hear about Zeta versions, are they suposed to be very stable? > >If: >alpha testing is done by people in the company, and >beta testing is done by people in the community, then >gamma (release) testing must be done by people in the world. Here's how I name my program versions during development: X.YZ [alpha/beta/gamma/release] where X denotes a huge step (major rewrites, lots of totally new features) for example "moved to MTD(f)" or "ported to Windows" Y (<=9) denotes a moderate step (several new features or one big new feature), for example "added null-move" or "added EPD support" Z (<=9) denotes a small step (new function added) for example "tuned check extensions" or "adjusted piece values" alpha - means testing by myself until considered bug-free beta - means testing by my company until considered bug-free gamma - means testing by external personnel, e.g. dedicated individuals at our customer's site release - is the one that finally is unleashed to the world In general, it is a good idea - not to step X too often (because people will say "was this product so bad you come up with a new major release every month?" [yes, it actually happens that people react that way!]) - not to step Y too often once you're in gamma (see above) - if you have to step Z very often, use "X.Y.Z" notation, allowing Y and Z to be greater than 9 without confusion --- Shep
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.