Mailing-List: contact user-help@bloodhound.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@bloodhound.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of olemis@gmail.com designates
 209.85.223.178 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+BGpn8JEzeCo5f76ObeBtKTQTKWh6N391uiBLgc1RAx1Vayow@mail.gmail.com>
References: <549067D3.6050603@millcomputing.com>
	<CAHLQ6mZv+4NruAy7NoHH3fsaAezATyQX94Mp9ykJBuVhB61eHw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CA+BGpn8JEzeCo5f76ObeBtKTQTKWh6N391uiBLgc1RAx1Vayow@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2014 02:20:47 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CAGMZAuMvAwo0ZRXWcZd5sW1NDs7oj-vX7nW4DMqamvKs1ObUTA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Broken demo link
From: Olemis Lang <olemis@gmail.com>
To: user@bloodhound.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

On 12/16/14, Ryan J Ollos <rjollos@apache.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 16, 2014 at 10:06 AM, Michael Jinks <michael.jinks@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> More broadly... What's the QA landscape for this project? I sort of get
>> the impression that this is one of those projects that works well for the
>> people creating it, but doesn't get much in the way of formal review on
>> its
>> way to release.
>>

If this was the case then Bloodhound would not be a top-level project
of the Apache Software Foundation , cmiiw .

>
> The changes are peer-reviewed and tested by developers contributing to the
> project. The release manager is responsible for smoke-testing the project
> before release, and those voting on the release should do the same.
>

there are many things to improve though ...

[...]

-- 
Regards,

Olemis - @olemislc

Apache(tm) Bloodhound contributor
http://issues.apache.org/bloodhound
http://blood-hound.net

Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/
Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/

Featured article: