Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!henry.jpl.nasa.gov!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!gryphon!desint!geoff
From: geoff@desint.UUCP (Geoff Kuenning)
Newsgroups: news.software.b
Subject: Re: Patch dates or Patch Numbers
Message-ID: <173@desint.UUCP>
Date: 20 Aug 89 08:51:17 GMT
References: <1989Aug17.171000.23302@utzoo.uucp> <2876@itivax.iti.org> <1989Aug19.215016.23031@utzoo.uucp>
Reply-To: geoff@desint.UUCP (Geoff Kuenning)
Organization: Interrupt Technology Corp., Manhattan Beach, CA
Lines: 48

In article <1989Aug19.215016.23031@utzoo.uucp> henry@utzoo.uucp (Henry Spencer) writes:

> Ah, but this is exactly my point:  it's not.  The difference between the
> various bookkeeping systems becomes significant only for large numbers
> of patches.  We hope to solve the how-to-track-lots-of-patches problem
> by avoiding it entirely.  If there are only a handful of patches, it just
> doesn't matter that much.

Henry, you don't exactly strike me as wet behind the ears.  I'm pretty sure
that you were on the net before I was, and I'm also pretty sure I've seen
you write about your memories of computing in the 60's.  Even if my memory
is wrong, it's rather clear from years of watching your postings that you're
no fool.  While I am less familiar with Geoff's work, I think I can safely
assume that he, too, reaches far beyond mere competence in his chosen field.

Why, then, is it that you take such a wet-behind-the-ears attitude towards
the bugs in and the longevity of your own software?  Surely you've heard
the saying, "there is no such thing as a bug-free program?"  Surely you've
dealt with other people's software for long enough to realize that even
widely-respected software by widely-respected programmers has lots of bugs
that require corrections?

Computers have existed for almost 45 years now, and certain things have
been learned during that time.  One of the lessons is that maintenance
is an unfortunate reality, and smart people plan for many years of
maintenance.

C news is certain to exist for many years.  Neither Henry nor Geoff is
even vaguely stupid (hell, Geoff even spells his name correctly :-).  So
why not study the maintenance lessons that others have struggled so
painfully to learn?  Five years from now, whether the total number of
C news patches is 3 or 45, people will have a much easier time keeping
track of the patches if they are numbered and handled professionally.

Climb down off your arrogant pedestals, Henry and Geoff.  The reality
is that you are not the only superb programmers in the world.  If you
learn from the lessons of other superb programmers, you will look less
foolish in a few years.  Check out Knuth's article in the July '89 SP&E
on bugs in TeX (I'm presuming you accept my premise that Knuth is no idiot,
either).

And face the truth:  well-designed maintenance is superior to
poorly-designed maintenance, regardless of how much is required.  Why,
when you have put so much effort into good design of your software, do
you think it is an advantage to be deliberately sloppy about maintenance?
Shoddiness is shoddiness, regardless of where it is found.
-- 
	Geoff Kuenning   geoff@ITcorp.com   uunet!desint!geoff