Re: (unverified) Ada mandate cancelled (Greg A would be proud)

[demer@hc17031.hcsd.ca (David Emery)]

Part of the problem with any (relatively arbitrary) DoD policy is that
it's not worth the paper it's printed on if it's not enforced.  The
Ada Mandate was never adequately enforced.  (I know of an instance
where it was possible to identify the LtCol who explicitly decided to
disobey the policy, knowing that this violated DoD policy and also
provisions of the then-current Defense Appropriations Act.  Several
investigations/studies identified this individual as the source of the
decision, and also clearly identified that this individual knew he was
violating policies/laws etc.  But nothing was ever done about it.)

Without enforcement, an "Ada preference" policy won't be worth
anything, either.  The USAF policy was quite good about how a SPO/PM
had to build his/her business case for an Ada waiver.  This was
ignored; SPOs never bothered to ask for waivers.  

As a part-time soldier, I'm disgusted with how easy it is for the
SPOs/PMs and their staffs to knowingly disobey policies, directives,
etc.  Remember that the SPO that makes this kind of decision is rarely
around when the resulting system is delivered, and almost never around
when the system goes into serious maintenance.  He's either promoted
or retired...  (One of the most common reasons I've heard is "Why, if
Ada is so good, doesn't Microsoft use it."  When you ask if the SPO/PM
is willing to wait for Version 3.1 of SDI to get it to work right, you
get no answer...)

In my opinion, the NRC study should have considered the DoD track
record for obeying existing policies while recommending changes to
same.  If we couldn't follow the old policy, why change it?

				dave

-- 
Note: if email to me bounces, use 'emery@grebyn.com'