From: Thomas Harding <tom@thomas-harding.name>
To: libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
Subject: Re: 7 Reasons to Avoid Open Source?
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2017 15:51:38 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <51CE34E5-D239-4AB5-A9D3-BADE51579762@thomas-harding.name> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20171204021255.n5atlesyayeeeuyw@hungrycats.org>
Le 4 décembre 2017 03:12:55 GMT+01:00, Chad Larson <BPYZs1fx@mailtoo.hungrycats.org> a écrit :
[...]
>> * Reason #1 – Lacks a traceable software development life cycle
>>
>In embedded project context, "traceability" refers to a matrix
>of requirements on the integrated product (e.g. "must implement
[...]
>Merely using a VCS is not sufficient. Traceability requires
>identifying
>individual persons responsible for determining requirements for the
>code, establishing their competence to design and implement the code,
>and
>demonstrating that the code implements the requirements correctly for
>each
>product that uses the code. Industrial regulations require
>traceability
>to determine which individual personally made which implementation
>decisions and which individual tested and verified the results.
>
[...]
>Practically, if an embedded project requires traceability, it can
>only import software that was developed with traceability, free or not;
>otherwise, the project typically has to assume liability for the
>imported
>software.
So, actually software is not used in that context as a software but as an industral product you can buy with warranty, and possibly discard your own responsabilty on (using) it regardless it's cost (then sue the furbisher).
Moreover, QA would not be done internally on "parts".
That makes sense on a manufacturing process, where you produce hundreds eachs then make destructive tests on some and warranty with fee in each part.
That's not the same on software, and that's why a fully tested " embedded software" can fail : just look at Ariane IV / Ariane V failure where a reused piece of code was untested on the last " because of QA ".
"There is no warranty" from upstream is the safest approach. While more expensive (...)
>> * Reason #7 – Integration is never as easy as it seems
>
>This is usually true in software projects, free or not.
>Underestimation of integration costs is an endemic phenomenon.
>
>Many of the other points are equally true for all software. Only the
>association of those points specifically and exclusively with free
>software is incorrect.
--
Je suis née pour partager, non la haine, mais l'amour.
Sophocle, Antigone, 442 av. J.C.
_______________________________________________
libreplanet-discuss mailing list
libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org
https://lists.libreplanet.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-04 14:52 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-03 4:45 7 Reasons to Avoid Open Source? Mary-Anne Wolf
2017-12-03 8:05 ` Andrés Muñiz Piniella
2017-12-03 10:44 ` Thomas Harding
2017-12-03 12:32 ` N.Thomas
2017-12-03 15:29 ` C.W. Epema
2017-12-03 19:22 ` Michael Pagan
2017-12-04 2:12 ` Chad Larson
2017-12-04 14:51 ` Thomas Harding [this message]
2017-12-04 15:06 ` Caleb Herbert
2017-12-04 19:02 ` Chad Larson
2017-12-04 23:59 ` Thomas Harding
2017-12-04 16:20 ` Adonay Felipe Nogueira
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libreplanet-discuss
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=51CE34E5-D239-4AB5-A9D3-BADE51579762@thomas-harding.name \
--to=tom@thomas-harding.name \
--cc=libreplanet-discuss@libreplanet.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).