Mike McCarty wrote: > When I was actively doing software development, my compiles > and assembles were without unexplained and deemed acceptable > warnings, [like "flow from one case: to another in a switch() > statement" when that was intended], and all my regression tests > were passed without any exceptions, and both integration > and compliance tests were all passed with no waivers.
Been there, done that. And I couldn't agree more. In my case, a failure could result in losing a $2M jet engine. It was a particular challenge because the engines were right out of overhaul, so the odds of a rebuild error were really quite high. The other area that I see in open source as a discrepancy is the general attitude on documentation. It is often either antipathy or hostility. On the positive side, I see people using version control and bug tracking lists to control the process and there is some acceptance to the consistent formating of the code. At LFS, we try to address the tickets and use a published editor's guide. And, after all, it is all documentation. Learning to work with a lot of people with strong opinions to turn out a reasonably timely product is a challenge. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
