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.