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=-1.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.5-pre1
Date: 26 May 93 23:48:52 GMT
From: dog.ee.lbl.gov!overload.lbl.gov!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.o
hio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!convex!spray@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU  (Rob Spray)
Subject: Re: Hey, blame the private sector!
Message-ID: <spray.738460132@convex.convex.com>
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

In <1993May26.182402.19744@source.asset.com> vand@source.asset.com (Laurence Va
nDolsen) writes:

>In article <EMERY.93May25191416@dr_no.mitre.org> emery@dr_no.mitre.org
>(David Emery) writes:

>> On the other
>>hand, what do you suppose the SEI CMM rating would be for Richard
>>Stallman, et.al. at the Free Software Foundation?

>Intriguing question.  They would probably conclude that he follows his
>proven process religiously.  A lot of the assessment methodology relies
>on having the process documented and being able to audit tangible
>artifacts which demonstrate adherence to the process.  I suspect that he
>works with such a small group that they have, generally, found this
>unnecessary.

Which infers that the FSF would be evaluated at a low CMM level,
which could bar them from being awarded a government contract
that required the contractor to have attained a certain CMM level.

--Rob  spray@convex.com