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, MSGID_RANDY autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,94270c9178ad7e7 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: katy_yong@my-deja.com Subject: Re: New Home for Ada-Malaysia Date: 1999/12/06 Message-ID: <82f5pe$fi3$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 556911979 References: <824s0t$h2r$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <8260kf$aan$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <828522$bho$1@clnews.edf.fr> <1999Dec3.104237.1@eisner> <82ctkj$ti$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <1999Dec5.101105.1@eisner> X-Http-Proxy: 1.0 x24.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 202.188.11.3 Organization: Deja.com - Before you buy. X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon Dec 06 02:07:44 1999 GMT X-MyDeja-Info: XMYDJUIDkaty_yong Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.7 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.33 i586) Date: 1999-12-06T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <1999Dec5.101105.1@eisner>, Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam wrote: > In article <82ctkj$ti$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Adrian Hoe writes: > > > My team members are quite sad on the feedbacks on CLA. For Ada sake, > > these people are trying to give their best in helping to promote Ada in > > Malaysia. Why put down their spirit??? > > I had not seen any discussion other than "the report looks great". > My only interest was to ensure that we didn't _all_ say that and > end up with egg on our face by discovering that there was no such > project or no such company. My feeling is that this report will > end up being quite famous. > > Knowing that there is a human on CLA who can discuss the project > and answer questions gives me reassurance. That being said, I > personally have no further questions. > > Larry Kilgallen > Thanks Adrian (byhoe) for explaining to CLA. The reading on these three graphs look "unrealistic" may have these reasons: 1. The reading for mix-language (V2) may not be accurate, meaning the actual values may be less or more than the published. These reading are gathered from the invoices that we had billed to the clients and there were no remarks indicating which exactly the job categories. Take downtime for example, the reading may include downtime caused by hardware or OS failure which this could never be stated on the old invoices. These invoices are more than 4 years old! 2. The reading for Ada port (V3) look promising 'good' because V3's algorithms and business rules are ported from V2 which had been stable for couple of years. Most of the bugs were being eliminated during design and coding phases. We have got three layers of QA for every lines/modules. We understand CLAs concerns over the authenticity of the study/document. If anyone would like further clarification, he/she is always welcomed. The posts in this thread, no doubt, has put some pressure to my team members. My team and I can comprehend that and I would like to represent them to let you know that this thread has given a lot of valuable experience in posting such success story and we will certainly exercise a more comprehensive practice in future success story. No hard feeling, yeah? :,) Warmest regards and many thanks to all who have visited Ada-Malaysia website and given their valuable and constructive critics. We appreciate very much. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy.