Samuel Kage wrote:
> Maybe you are right about the blanket statements. But I'm no hacker.
>
Please don't become a hacker. :-) but rather, you can become a
programmer/developer/engineer. You don't need to go to engineering
college like I did. However, reading books isn't enough, you really
need a mentor to "grade" your work.
> So I can't write code. All I know I can do is writing bug reports
> (Which I already do) and say what I think to animate people to
> reconsider some things (What I've tried with the first post). But if
> a bug report has to be written, it is already to late in a way (Hope
> you see what I mean). That applies only for major releases and for
> obvious bugs of course.
>
Yes, I hear you, I understand, and I agree. Bug reports should not take
the place of basic TQM testing (quality control) by the person or team
that wrote the code. You are correct that it should not be necessary to
file bug reports for obvious defects. Bug reports should be for those
obscure cases that most people won't find, and which, for the same
reasons, testing will not usually find.
We appear to be building software the way that Detroit used to build
cars. They would build the whole care and then the inspectors would
look at the car and try to find what was wrong with it and fix it. They
don't build cars that way anymore. TQM and the ideas of William Edwards
Deming are now the way of almost all manufacturing. His ideas and TQM
can be applied to software as well. The thing is that not only does
this result in better quality but it is less work to do it that way.
Less work to prevent the bugs from entering the code base than to go
back later and try to fix them later. And, to repeat myself, bug free
software starts with good design.
--
JRT
___________________________________________________
This message is from the kde mailing list.
Account management: https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde.
Archives: http://lists.kde.org/.
More info: http://www.kde.org/faq.html.
