Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!ads.com!saturn!jgautier From: jgautier@vangogh.ads.com (Jorge Gautier) Newsgroups: comp.software-eng Subject: Re: Software Quality Message-ID: Date: 22 Mar 91 18:04:14 GMT References: <36650001@hpopd.pwd.hp.com> Sender: usenet@ads.com (USENET News) Organization: Advanced Decision Systems, Mountain View, CA 94043, +1 (415) 960-7300 Lines: 16 In-Reply-To: daves@hpopd.pwd.hp.com's message of 21 Mar 91 10:44:49 GMT In article <36650001@hpopd.pwd.hp.com> daves@hpopd.pwd.hp.com (Dave Straker) writes: > "Process data must not be used to compare projects or individuals. Its > purpose is to illuminate the product being developed and to provide an > informed basis for improving the process. When such data is used by > management to evaluate individuals or teams, the reliability of the > data itself will deteriorate." If this process data is to be used to improve the process, it must be pretty damn good. I mean, it must be measuring the methods used for development and their causal relationships to the quality of the product. Care to share these metrics with the rest of us? I'm serious. At least provide some references, please. -- Jorge A. Gautier| "The enemy is at the gate. And the enemy is the human mind jgautier@ads.com| itself--or lack of it--on this planet." -General Boy DISCLAIMER: All statements in this message are false.