I mentioned earlier on past thread, and still stand by the statement
that setting up a collaborative space beyond email is key to
attracting, enabling and growing an active beta testing user base who
is committed to genuinely testing, breaking and improving new
features. Access to code, commenting, tickets to track improvements
with real-time collaboration are super table-stakes. It may be too
late for this alpha3 but something for the future to consider.
I am actively running content marketing to rally excitement behind
current and future release like alpha3 but more across the spectrum
would increase visibility and 'fill the funnel' for new engaged
beta-users wanting to push the alpha's over the line. Super key.
On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 9:58 AM, Johan Corveleyn <jcorvel_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 6:35 PM, Daniel Shahaf <d.s_at_daniel.shahaf.name> wrote:
>> Johan Corveleyn wrote on Tue, 15 Aug 2017 11:57 +0200:
>>> Can we try to give 1.10 alpha3 a bit more exposure, in order to gather
>>> more feedback? I'm thinking of:
>>> - A post to users@, […]
>>> - Reaching out to producers of binaries to create a 1.10-alpha3 […]
>>> - Announce / ask feedback more prominently on our own website.
>>> - Reach out to software that integrates SVN (e.g. IDE's) to start
>>> working on 1.10 support, […]
>> Just one: ideally, by the time we post to users@, alpha3 binaries will already
>> be available for most libsvn_client consumers.
> Hm, yes. I guess that would be best. But maybe the binary packagers
> also would like a short write-up to accompany their publishing of the
> 1.10 alpha3.
> So I'm imagining that:
> 1. We write some short explanation / call for testing, that we can
> send to interested binary packagers (a text they can reuse when
> publishing for their users / on their website).
> 2. We contact binary packagers and ask them if they'd like to help out
> by publishing 1.10 alpha3 somewhere (clearly marked as "alpha /
> unstable / cutting edge"), where they can reuse our text from 1 if
> they want. We ask them to confirm it and when they'll do it.
> 3. We publish details on our own website, linking to the various
> binary packagers that have confirmed.
> 4. We mail users@ with some extended version of text 1., with a link
> to our own webpage and links to the various binaries that have become
> 5. Where possible / known, we contact other software vendors that
> integrate SVN (IDE's etc) if they'd like to join the effort, and
> prepare their software to handle tree conflicts using the new
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:00 PM, Nathan Hartman
> <hartman.nathan_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>> I assume alpha status means not for production use.
>> The question then is how to test effectively, in a manner that
>> is representative of real use
>> without excessive risk to data.
>> It may be helpful to include suggestions in the
>> aforementioned exposure.
> For the tree conflict resolution feature we're mainly interested in
> client-side testing. So end-users trying the 1.10 alpha3 on a working
> copy, either during their daily work (with all disclaimers about it
> being only an alpha) or to try out typical scenario's where they
> encounter tree conflicts. They can do a significant part of
> experimentation / testing without even committing the result to their
> I guess you're right: we should write up a couple of suggestions on
> how users can test the alpha.
> On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 11:37 PM, Andreas Stieger
> <andreas.stieger_at_gmx.de> wrote:
>> The openSUSE project has 1.10 alpha3 binaries ready for all current
>> openSUSE and SUSE Linux Enterprise distributions.
> Great, thanks Andreas!
Chief Technology Officer
+1 210 410 7661
Received on 2017-08-17 17:21:49 CEST