NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #31/NN_1992_31.iso/spool/comp/software/5135

Text File | 1992-12-22 | 2.2 KB | 50 lines

Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!wupost!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!claird
From: [e-mail] (Cameron Laird)
Subject: Appeal to SEI (was: Debugging the process)
Organization: NeoSoft Communications Services -- [phone]
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 03:33:47 GMT
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Keywords: "sie cmm" "sw engineering" "process improvement" "sw quality"
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Lines: 38

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
>Bill Watt's excellent article focusses our attention once again on
>the real goal:  producing high quality (sw) porducts.  In general,
            .
            .
            .
>My understanding of the CMM differs from what I infer is Bill's in
>that he seems to believe that the CMM requires (or suggests or even
>encourages) delaying the implementation of product quality metrics
>and atomic process quality metrics until "the final level" while my
>understanding of the model is that a company should make its own
>decision about when to implement these metrics, but that the company
>cannot be deemed to have achieved Level 4 until after they have been
>implemented.  I would agree with Bill that a company would (probably)
>be making a serious mistake to defer implementation of such metrics
>until after they had done everything else to achieve Level 4.
Time-out.  Someone get the attention of the SEI--oh,
OK, I'll write them, over the break--and tell them
that the consensus position of c.s-e readers on this
point is that we have no consensus.

Hard-working, thoughtful engineers keep writing about
"my understanding of the CMM regarding implementation
of metrics ...", and coming to all sorts of conclusions.
At some point, I'm going to invoke the tiny bit of
human-factors goop that I know, and decide that it's
time for the SEI to make the point more clear, one way
or another.  As intellectual customers of the SEI pro-
duct, we're having to work too hard.  SEI needs to add
just a bit of value in this one area.
            .
            .
            .
--

Cameron Laird
[e-mail] ([e-mail])    [phone]
[e-mail] ([e-mail])      [phone]