Many opensource programmers read/write for TamsPalm. Most of them mentioned that their (pretty successful) beta campaigns worked radically different from the one outlined in The Art of Beta Testing-but why? For example, random testing works well with opensource products, but tanked with most commercial apps. Damn opensource world=).
Opensource products are radically different from closed source apps, as they aren’t created to generate revenue. Beta testers don’t join these projects to sweep licences-they join them for fun, learning or to ‘pay their dues’. This leads to highly motivated beta testers which link found bugs to ‘honor’-and thus are extremely motivated.
The second thing is that developers of opensource products usually are not under release pressure; they can basically release what they want when they want to without anyone beeing able to sue/etc them.
Last but not least, users of opensource products usually are more likely to accept bugs and strange workarounds than users who purchased commercial apps. After all, we paid for it, so we want sth that works.
Overall, the opensource and commercial worlds are very different. Some ideas can be transferred between the two worlds, however, testing is a process that is fundamentally different in the cathedral and the bazaar….
What do you think?
Related posts:
