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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5aa763fe62c20184 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f849b,5aa763fe62c20184 X-Google-Attributes: gidf849b,public X-Google-Thread: 114f47,9a16bb5c96f2f36a X-Google-Attributes: gid114f47,public X-Google-Thread: 115aec,5aa763fe62c20184 X-Google-Attributes: gid115aec,public From: Marin David Condic Subject: Re: Pratt & Whitney's Embedded Software - CMM Level 3! Date: 1999/04/22 Message-ID: <371F9097.F328D623@pwfl.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 469713807 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: condicma@bogon.pwfl.com References: <371B6EC8.36B9C247@pwfl.com> <7fftel$6po@drn.newsguy.com> <371B9A5E.2804AC27@pwfl.com> <371E21B3.7C7616FD@pwfl.com> <371E9BA0.7F070ACC@well.com> <371F3734.F47236E2@pwfl.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Pratt & Whitney Mime-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: diespammer@pwfl.com Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.realtime,comp.arch.embedded,comp.software.config-mgmt Date: 1999-04-22T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Jim Kingdon wrote: > Well, that might be an argument for open source rather than an > argument against it. The big problem with trying to sell open source > software via support contracts is that most users don't really > need/want the support. But if the nature of the product is that most > users will need some customization and help, then that particular > problem isn't as bad (now, it isn't really the way to get massive > numbers of sites using it, but it might work out for sites which want > to deal with this). > I can see your point. From the outside vendor's perspective it is more attractive to continually sell support & customization. I just don't know what the powers-that-be think about this sort of thing. They alternate between "Its a critical competitive advantage that we can't let get out the door!" all the way to "We're an engine company, not a software company - outsource everything!" > > Bringing it back to P&W and the Pictures-to-Code program, it is quite > clear that someone outside P&W needs to get a bee in their bonnet and > decide they want to make this happen (with $$$ or some other suitable > incentive). Has anyone asked Ada Core (http://www.gnat.com/)? No > idea whether they would be interested, but it seems like a conceivable > fit. I think a lot of what the whole toolset does is a bit far afield for ACT. There are parts of it which would be right up their alley - sort of. The picture compiler is, after all, just another compiler. (IMHO, the picture compiler badly needs to be rewritten to take into account Ada95-isms and clean up areas where experience has shown us better ways. But unless we could get a better thing as COTS to integrate with the rest of the system, I doubt this will happen.) A good general diagram-to-code tool with maybe a couple of application specific diagram formats might be a good sell here. I'd be sorely tempted to want to be in on the development of this since I have spent a number of years grumbling about some of the shortcomings of our existing picture compiler! :-) MDC -- Marin David Condic Real Time & Embedded Systems, Propulsion Systems Analysis United Technologies, Pratt & Whitney, Large Military Engines M/S 731-95, P.O.B. 109600, West Palm Beach, FL, 33410-9600 ***To reply, remove "bogon" from the domain name.*** Visit my web page at: http://www.flipag.net/mcondic