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=0.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,6f0ad5b8fa43069b X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Hyman Rosen Subject: Re: Software Development Date: 2000/05/07 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 620400662 Sender: hymie@calumny.jyacc.com References: <8es3sf$2q2$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <20000507094437.10742.00001809@ng-bj1.aol.com> X-Complaints-To: abuse@panix.com X-Trace: news.panix.com 957732559 8444 209.49.126.226 (7 May 2000 20:49:19 GMT) Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and UNIX, NYC NNTP-Posting-Date: 7 May 2000 20:49:19 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 2000-05-07T20:49:19+00:00 List-Id: anthonygair@aol.comremoveme (ANTHONY GAIR) writes: > CMM is far better than ISO9000 despite being created by the U.S. > ISO inspectors maybe are far easier to fool or bribe. Software quality practices should be undertaken voluntarily because an organization wishes to improve the quality of its processes and code. Obviously such practices imposed from the outside will lead to nowhere but the cheating you mention, much as some New York City schoolteachers helped their students cheat on standardized exams in order to increase the reputation of their schools and protect their funding. I understand that there are companies who will buy only from vendors who promise to abide by some specific quality methodology. This will make cheating inevitable.