On 3/28/21 12:54 PM, Giuseppe D'Angelo wrote:
Il 28/03/21 13:54, Roland Hughes ha scritto:
There is documentation and Web pages that have
replicated all over stating Qt 5 supports RHEL 6. You made something
that cannot be effectively erased untrue.
The documentation in question states that_specific_ Qt 5.x versions
support RHEL 6. There's no such thing as "Qt 5 documentation".
And ___THAT___ is the documentation and glossies management looked at
when it made the decision to use Qt in the first place. It got specified
in the Software Architecture Document.
I know of no other package that thinks it is okay to drop platforms mid
major release. Even Zinc didn't do that.
Management: "Qt 5 supports RHEL 6 and Qt has been around twenty years so
you will use Qt for the UI and much of the application."
Developers: "Okay. You're the boss." [...]
Wait, weren't you the guy saying that agile is bad and you should get
324 documents cross-checked and triple stamped before writing one single
line of code? I assume "trust inaccurate hearsay" and "make gross
generalization" are in those documents?
Not amused at all,
You can be "no amused" all you want. The last two years with Qt have
been a __complete__ debacle.
What do you think ___starts___ the process of creating The Four Holy
Documents? A *Work Initiation Document*. It's a formal SDLC document
that generally contains at least one, if not more, grouped
requests/features management wants in the next release. From there the
SDLC process follows:
1.
Business Requirements Document (BRD)
2.
System Requirements Document (SRD)
3.
System Architecture Document (SAD; a.k.a. System Architecture
Specification or SAS)
4.
System Specification Document (SSD; a.k.a. Functional Specification;
or System Functional Specification – SFS; or System Design
Specification – SDS)
2&3 can, and often are, created side by side. *This* is where you find
out that, unlike other major software products, mid-major-release
number, platforms were dropped. That's when the conversation from System
Architect and developers go back to management.
When management has already sold it to the customer and pre-spent their
bonus check is when the relentless head slamming starts.
Yeah, I've been on the other side of that. Nothing like management
promising features to the outside world without first checking with
development. Usually promised in the next major release too. Back in
2014 got to dynamically generate a spreadsheet image on a graphics scene
that updated with real-time test data because someone had mocked up an
image and promised customers a spreadsheet like display with angled
headers and flick scrolling with zoom. All on an under powered embedded
system.
That's how stuff like this happens in the real world. Nothing AGILE
about it. Management decides what will be in the next release. If
they've already sold it (and in most cases they have) there is no
talking them out of it.
https://dilbert.com/search_results?terms=%22changes+are+free%22
--
Roland Hughes, President
Logikal Solutions
(630)-205-1593
http://www.theminimumyouneedtoknow.com
http://www.infiniteexposure.net
http://www.johnsmith-book.com
http://www.logikalblog.com
http://www.interestingauthors.com/blog
_______________________________________________
Interest mailing list
Interest@qt-project.org
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/interest
