View Single Post
Posts: 53 | Thanked: 49 times | Joined on Jun 2007
#4
Originally Posted by ARJWright View Post
One side that's probably not considered often here is that even though Nokia is using open source software the business processes might not be as open and so hence the delay.
I atleast though of the business process and I think it is exactly the problem. It does not need to be open, it needs speed. It just between 2005 and 2009 there has been already many years.

Originally Posted by ARJWright View Post
Concerning updates on included software, the questions that have to be asked include:
- does the update address something that has no dependency on locale/carrier included parameters with an object?
If it has a dependency, how can Nokia communicate their process effectively without damaging stakeholder relationships?
- Maemo as a commnuity needs to help enable Nokia to be able ot answer this question.
Funky, there were no operators involved before, so is this going to get even worse ? .. I don't know what the process involves now but it shouldn't be much more complicated than: check it fixes the bug, check that old bugs do not appear, check it does not create new bugs, update docs, update i18n if necessary, release. A bugfix diminishes liabilities too, so lawyers are not needed and they will be sad!

I would be content with at promise that a fix in the version control would be released as bugfix release in 5 days, in 10 for issue with dependencies. Just make it (tm) happen - figure out why it is not happening and then fix the process. If somebody would go and measure the current fix-to-release process and check the lead times between "processing" stages, I sure they would find out that the fixes are just waiting "in storage" 99% of the time. That is waste(d time).

Last edited by VRe; 2009-12-03 at 22:17.