[RFC] Software Process Improvement in Free Software, Closing the Quality Cycle, Inventing Non-Developer-Demotivating QA/QM/SPI
I'm forwarding this second mail from Thomas which was posted to the
wrong list. Let's continue the discussion on -qa.
----- Forwarded message from Thomas Schorpp <t.schorpp@gmx.de> -----
From: Thomas Schorpp <t.schorpp@gmx.de>
Reply-To: t.schorpp@gmx.de
Subject: [Fwd: Re: [RFC] Software Process Improvement in Free Software, Closing
the Quality Cycle, Inventing Non-Developer-Demotivating QA/QM/SPI]
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 19:18:04 +0100
To: leader@debian.org, debian-ctte@lists.debian.org
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041007 Debian/1.7.3-5
X-Accept-Language: en
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Respected Madames and Sirs,
I've seen Your efforts to maintain the quality of Your SW-distribution
on qa-debian.org:
" We know that, at the moment, there is no real quality assurance for
Debian, in a conventional meaning of that term. Although we have a
strict and well defined Policy which defines all the requirements for
packages, a "department" is missing which would assure that those rules
are followed in every package, and that packages are well integrated
into a system. "
As experienced developer since 1984, Studies of SW-QM/Processes at
University and Process Automation Industry, and former certified Quality
Mananagment Professional (German DGQ e.V.) I suggest building a "real"
quality managers team with extended work focus to full QM and SPI ( e.g.
like stated below) soon with my application as member to You.
I also question You as "consortium" organisation to join the german
government "IT Offensive 2006", e.g., since theres lack of both: Free
Software Organisations participation and Software Quality Management.
QM-Research and Development is cost intensive, maybe we could get
assigned some funds from there, too. http://www.softwarefoerderung.de/
Personally, I could spend full time for such a project since I'm "out of
~ commercial industry" and handicapped since a motorcycle accident in
2001, so my commercial consulting abilities are very limited now to home
office.
The statement below awaits further analysis/research discussion.
Respectively Yours,
Thomas Schorpp
P.S.: Some literature for people interested to join:
- - ISO 9000-3 (little too old), 12207, TR 15504 (SPICE, esi.es), CMMx
standards (cmu.edu).
- - Publication of the SPR inc. CEO: "Assessments, Benchmarks and Best
Practices ( good for SPI practioneers ).
- - DGQ ITG 12-51/52 books (little outdated, but good to start)
- - Many publications on software qa (testing) around.
...
- -------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [RFC] Software Process Improvement in Free Software,
Closing the Quality Cycle, Inventing Non-Developer-Demotivating QA/QM/SPI
Resent-Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 09:25:41 -0600 (CST)
Resent-From: debian-qa@lists.debian.org
Date: Mon, 01 Nov 2004 16:26:01 +0100
From: Thomas Schorpp <t.schorpp@gmx.de>
Reply-To: t.schorpp@gmx.de
To: debian-qa@lists.debian.org
References: <4185D3BA.8050000@gmx.de>
Thomas Schorpp wrote:
| hi all,
|
| as i see you try to maintain quality in debian efficently.
|
| ive been thinking for months now about inventing and adopting
| the SPI-standards cmm(x), spice, iso12207, and iso 9001,
| etc, in free sw's lifecycles
| and would like to ask you about comments and discussion.
|
| discussion/research points:
|
| 1. closing and improving the spi/qm/qa- cycle with the developers by
| analyzing their dev-processes, tools, configuration/analysis mngmnt and
| give non-demotivating feedback with
|
| -what i call now- "CMP" ( Capability Maturity Points), scale 10-100
| (log).
|
| the classic industry way has shown up to be demotivating, developers
| would avoid the system or even trick it off.
|
| 2. escape the megawave of developer->feature->bug->developer bad cycles
| by targeting q-lacks at the beginning of a lifecyle leaving no stage
| uncovered, just building a dam against the bug-hazard at the end
| and maintaining old waterfall structures has shown up no more
| sufficent -UNDEPENDENTLY- of the size and amount of sw-project(s).
|
| 3. research, collect and provide "best practices", not just scales.
|
4. invent software metrics for oss like function/class points.
| . . .
|
|
|
| y
| tom
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.3.90 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Debian - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iQCVAwUBQYZ92Wqsze5HSzyoAQJanAP/crCU1YYR/+wkRTvSGcGgNwn7mzddoDQb
eTiDLsSaTQJmN1/U5ku+pwdIUEhDtALjap/D3/wL36CbrhTM1xso4/U3jo8q7XUH
KFeilHIj2Zuf8/wXUaIBvntdCXf7ti2XirmRIjmScnmGHt9FIvWK4u/89elxO5n1
WzBpbzox020=
=j1bt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
----- End forwarded message -----
--
Martin Michlmayr
http://www.cyrius.com/
Reply to: