From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f849b,5aa763fe62c20184 X-Google-Attributes: gidf849b,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,5aa763fe62c20184 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 115aec,5aa763fe62c20184 X-Google-Attributes: gid115aec,public X-Google-Thread: 114f47,9a16bb5c96f2f36a X-Google-Attributes: gid114f47,public From: "William P.Milam" Subject: Re: Pratt & Whitney's Embedded Software - CMM Level 3! Date: 1999/04/22 Message-ID: <371F452A.4021@sirius.srl.ford.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 469617811 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <371B6EC8.36B9C247@pwfl.com> <7fftel$6po@drn.newsguy.com> <371B9A5E.2804AC27@pwfl.com> <371E21B3.7C7616FD@pwfl.com> <371E9BA0.7F070ACC@well.com> <371F38B0.1D24157A@pwfl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Ford Motor Company Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.realtime,comp.arch.embedded,comp.software.config-mgmt Date: 1999-04-22T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Marin David Condic wrote: > > Jim Kingdon wrote: > > > > I don't really know whether open source would provide a big payoff for > > P&W - to really leverage it needs a pretty different mindset and > > development process from what many are used to - but I do think open > > source makes sense, in general, for tools which would otherwise be > > internally developed/maintained. > > If we were ever to make the whole thing generally available it would > probably have to be with some subcontractor who was providing us with > custom development and support for the product. We'd want them to be > hawking the product elsewhere with the hope that with more companies > paying for the custom development, we'd get more features for our > dollars. What they did with the sources, etc., I doubt we'd care much > about so long as we were getting the enhancements we wanted at a price > we thought was reasonable. The problem is, as I stated in an earlier > post, the nature of the system is so volatile that it doesn't lend > itself well to being a "stand alone commercial product". > Have you looked at things like the Mathowrks MATLAB/Simulink/Stateflow product as a option for 'programming by pictures'? Sounds to me that much of what you offer may now be available from commercial vendors, or close enough to warrant arm twisting.... Bill -- ************************************************ * * * All opinions herein expressed are mine and * * mine alone. You may choose to ignore them * * but I own them. Heck, my kids don't listen * * to me, why should you? * * * * Email: wmilam'at'ford'dot'com * ************************************************