From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.5-pre1 (2020-06-20) on ip-172-31-74-118.ec2.internal X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_50 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1 Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1993 20:47:35 -0400 (EDT) From: MMC/CS 609-338-2922/8-794-2922 Subject: RE: 2167A Questions Message-ID: <930722204735.2560f555@CAYMAN.VF.GE.COM> List-Id: >Date: 21 Jul 93 20:01:59 GMT >From: agate!howland.reston.ans.net!darwin.sura.net!source.asset.com!vand@ucbva x.Berkeley.EDU (Laurence VanDolsen) >Subject: Re: 2167A Questions >Message-ID: <1993Jul21.200159.32712@source.asset.com> >In article <1993Jul21.143352.17146@newshost.lanl.gov> hines@paloverde.lanl.gov writes: > >In article 26847@sctc.com, aldrin@sctc.com (John Aldrin) writes: >> ... 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. > >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 sta ndard" >(whatever that means). >>>Mr Van Dolson's response to the above was good - I add my 2 cents. CSCI/CSC/CSU: 1. Look at CSCI/CSC/CSU like Book/Chapter/Paragraph. You declare something a paragraph because it has sentences which convey a thought; chapters are groupings of paragraphs addressing some aspect of a theme; the book addresses the entire theme. Your chapter may be my book - there is no *right* answer. 2. When defining CSCIs, think about how you are going to be doing configuration management (documenting changes, bumping up rev levels, etc). If you have defined 2 CSCIs and think modifying one will almost always require modification of the other, they should probably be merged. 3. For a DoD job, it is better to *err* with too few rather than twoo many CSCIs - CSCI documentation is a major cost driver. 4. If you are working Ada, many people declare a package to be a CSC and procedures to be CSUs. For a DoD job, you often have to report progress at the CSC level so it is important to group CSUs or you'll get in a tight loop writing progress reports on why you are late because you are always writing progress reports. 5. When declaring a CSC, plan on testing all its CSUs at the same time. This should save you a lot of drivers and stubs. 2167A: 1. Agree that it is a pretty good framework for guiding projects - but it must be intelligently tailored to your project. 2. If your customer thinks Moses brought 2167A down on a second set of stone tablets, find a good sector mutual fund that concentrates in pharmaceuticals - look for holdings in manufacturers of Maalox, Aspirin, etc. 3. 2167A requires traceability of requirements to CSUs. Type 1 customers require this; Type 2 customers go for the CSC level. Everyone should have a Type 1 customer so they appreciate Type 2. One of the purposes of requirements allocation is to establish the basis for test plans. Test Plans/Procedures are usually written to test CSCs rather than CSUs It's similar to trying to understand the significance of a paragraph - you normally need to read the chapter to find out the significance of a paragraph and whether the paragraph hits its mark. Allen L. Starr, Martin Marietta Corp/Communications Systems/AE-2E One Federal Street, Camden, NJ 08102 astarr@carib.vf.ge.com phone: 609-338-2922; fax: 609-338-4686 -----------------------------