berenger.mo...@neutralite.org wrote:
the changes are that the stuff that must work best, is NOT being done
as open source or with particular transparency. At best, we can hope
for serious design reviews and testing - not always the case.
Which takes us back to a pretty good case for professional licensing
and review - of the sort applied to doctors, civil engineers,
architects, and so on.
I was, in fact, thinking about that: pair review. With the opportunity
to have more reviews when you build a software than when you heal
someone, since your software will, theoretically, be maintained
several years, while you will heal someone several days only (at
least, for important operations like surgery), and the operations
itself won't last more than few hours.
Pair review is kind of useless if the both people are hired and managed
by the same organization.
Regarding the whole Windows environment stuff: I believe it was YOU who
started out talking about how nice Windows is as a development
environment. I was simply agreeing that it is where most of the world
is - and suggesting part of the reason is that the target environment is
out there and widespread.
This whold thread has gone way off topic and it's time to drop it.
Miles
--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is. .... Yogi Berra
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/52658ece.6050...@meetinghouse.net
