Re: 2167A Questions

[paloverde!hines@lanl.gov (Donn Hines)]

In article 26847@sctc.com, aldrin@sctc.com (John Aldrin) writes:
>I assume most people involved with this group work in the defense 
>community so I thought I would post these questions here.
>The company I work for has just decided to write their doco
>to the 2167A format.  The concept of what the definition of CSU's, CSC's and
>CSCI's are somewhat vague.  I was hoping those of u who have dealt with
>this standard may be able to provide good definitions of CSU's, CSC's and
>CSCI's.  Any real-life examples would be greatly appreciated.
>

Hello.

We are undertaking a project that "wants" 2167A documentation also. I attended
WAdaS (Washington Ada Symposium) in late June. One focus was the upcoming repla
cement
for 2167A, currently referred to as MIL-STD-SDD (probably will be 498). It appe
ars
that it will be more flexible, supporting any design paradigm
(OOD, structured design, whatever) and any lifecycle methodology (waterfall, sp
iral,
etc.) Hopefully it will eliminate CSC's and CSU's also. I believe it is due to
be out in the spring-summer '94 timeframe (maybe earlier?), and you can obtain 
draft
copies.

Lewis Gray, Chair of Software Development Standards and Ada Working Group (SDSA
WG)
is an important point of contact. Email for him is gray@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu, and
he can point you in the right direction. I know you can get copies on floppy, a
nd
probably via ftp (I need to get a copy myself).

Anyway, we intend to shoot towards the new standard rather than tie ourselves
in knots with 2167A. Our approach will be to "tailor 2167A towards the new stan
dard"
(whatever that means).

We (a coworker and I) drew up a trip report that highlighted some of the benifi
ts
of the new standard. Email me and I will send you the relevant exerpts from our
report.

-donn hines    hines@paloverde.lanl.gov