berenger.morel@neutralite.org wrote:
the changes are that the stuff that must work best, is NOT being done as open source or with particular transparency. At best, we can hope for serious design reviews and testing - not always the case. Which takes us back to a pretty good case for professional licensing and review - of the sort applied to doctors, civil engineers, architects, and so on.I was, in fact, thinking about that: pair review. With the opportunity to have more reviews when you build a software than when you heal someone, since your software will, theoretically, be maintained several years, while you will heal someone several days only (at least, for important operations like surgery), and the operations itself won't last more than few hours.
Pair review is kind of useless if the both people are hired and managed by the same organization.
Regarding the whole Windows environment stuff: I believe it was YOU who started out talking about how nice Windows is as a development environment. I was simply agreeing that it is where most of the world is - and suggesting part of the reason is that the target environment is out there and widespread.
This whold thread has gone way off topic and it's time to drop it. Miles -- In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra