4 ms·
> I would also guess a risk is that with less time on the pre-stable channels for testing, there might actually be more bugs and issues as a result Is it also
by deadmutex 6y ago
> I would also guess a risk is that with less time on the pre-stable channels for testing, there might actually be more bugs and issues as a result
Is it also possible that a shorter window would allow less number of features being in flux in each release? Perhaps that actually leads to easier bug triaging, etc.
Disclaimer: Work at Google, but not on Chrome.
- dralley 6y agoWhy not just do bugfix releases? Much less risk...
- lkbm 6y agoThat's not the issue. If you release two changes at once and a bug appears, you look at those two changes. If you release ten changes at once and a bug appears, you have ten things to look into. In either case, you do a bugfix release, but finding the source of the bug is much easier if you do smaller releases.
- mrighele 6y agoOn the other side, if you release the software more often, there is an higher probability for a bug to end up in the hands of the users instead of being found internally. Given that most people won't ever report a bug, do like firefox and give to willing people a nightly/developer/preview edition and to regular people something released less often.
- Chris_Newton 6y agoIMHO, this isn’t a compelling argument. For a large application like a browser, even releasing every few weeks, surely there will not be two or ten changes since the last release but probably hundreds. If a bug makes it into a new release and none of the developers sees the report and immediately realises where it probably came from, won’t they look for a more systematic method to identify when it started happening than manually examining every change since the last release?