Reply by Albert van der Horst●December 7, 20082008-12-07
In article <uCbtm$BTwQKJFA7w@phaedsys.demon.co.uk>,
Chris H <chris@phaedsys.org> wrote:
<SNIP>
>
>>Additionally, few software projects have such a clear control of the
>>history of their code and the contributions to them as large open
>>source projects. Collaborative open source projects are carried out in
>>public, and the people who have write access to the source code trees
>>are all vetted by their peers around the world.
>
>For safety critical systems you require qualified and experienced
>people.....
>
>> All commits are discussed and reviewed. Contrary to your beliefs,
>>there is excellent control and traceability in such projects - much
>>more so than in many closed source projects
>
>I do have some evidence to the country for GCC but it is not in a public
>document (it comes from one of the GCC development places)
Open up your archives for my scrutiny and I will dig up "evidence to
the contrary" of *your* excellent control and traceability.
>\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
>\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
>\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Groetjes Albert
--
--
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- like all pyramid schemes -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst
Reply by CBFalconer●November 28, 20082008-11-28
Stef wrote:
> Rocky <RobertGush@gmail.com> wrote:
>> CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Stef wrote:
>>>> CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> Oliver Betz wrote:
>>>
>>>>> ... snip ...
>>>
>>>>>> Slightly off-topic but similar: I have been sending so
>>>>>> many reports about silicon and documentation errors to a
>>>>>> uC manufacturer. Always hard to convince first level
>>>>>> support that it is a bug. After being successful there,
>>>>>> with some luck, it's published not sooner than one year
>>>>>> later.
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought the publishing time objective was within one month
>>>>> (+-) of announcing the end of availability. :-)
>>>>
>>>> And what do you get when you add those statements?
>>>
>>> I think you failed to notice the smiley.
>>
>> No, I think Stef just forgot to add one himself.
>
> Not really forgotten, I thought it was obvious enough. But to
> make it clear to everyone:
I have painfully found, after many silly events, that it is NEVER
sufficiently obvious to all.
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
Reply by Stef●November 27, 20082008-11-27
In comp.arch.embedded,
Rocky <RobertGush@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Nov 27, 2:32�am, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Stef wrote:
>> > CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >> Oliver Betz wrote:
>>
>> >> ... snip ...
>>
>> >>> Slightly off-topic but similar: I have been sending so many
>> >>> reports about silicon and documentation errors to a uC
>> >>> manufacturer. Always hard to convince first level support that
>> >>> it is a bug. After being successful there, with some luck, it's
>> >>> published not sooner than one year later.
>>
>> >> I thought the publishing time objective was within one month (+-)
>> >> of announcing the end of availability. �:-)
>>
>> > And what do you get when you add those statements?
>>
>> I think you failed to notice the smiley.
>>
> No, I think Stef just forgot to add one himself.
Not really forgotten, I thought it was obvious enough. But to make it
clear to everyone:
oooo$$$$$$$$$$$$oooo
oo$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$o
oo$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$o o$ $$ o$
o $ oo o$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$o $$ $$ $$o$
oo $ $ "$ o$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$o $$$o$$o$
"$$$$$$o$ o$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$o $$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$ """$$$
"$$$""""$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ "$$$
$$$ o$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ "$$$o
o$$" $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$o
$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$" "$$$$$$ooooo$$$$o
o$$$oooo$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ o$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$"$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$""""""""
"""" $$$$ "$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$" o$$$
"$$$o """$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$"$$" $$$
$$$o "$$""$$$$$$"""" o$$$
$$$$o o$$$"
"$$$$o o$$$$$$o"$$$$o o$$$$
"$$$$$oo ""$$$$o$$$$$o o$$$$""
""$$$$$oooo "$$$o$$$$$$$$$"""
""$$$$$$$oo $$$$$$$$$$
""""$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$$$
$$$$$$$$$$"
"$$$""""
[William "WILLS" Towle]
--
Stef (remove caps, dashes and .invalid from e-mail address to reply by mail)
Bennett's Laws of Horticulture:
(1) Houses are for people to live in.
(2) Gardens are for plants to live in.
(3) There is no such thing as a houseplant.
Reply by Rocky●November 27, 20082008-11-27
On Nov 27, 2:32=A0am, CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Stef wrote:
> > CBFalconer <cbfalco...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> Oliver Betz wrote:
>
> >> ... snip ...
>
> >>> Slightly off-topic but similar: I have been sending so many
> >>> reports about silicon and documentation errors to a uC
> >>> manufacturer. Always hard to convince first level support that
> >>> it is a bug. After being successful there, with some luck, it's
> >>> published not sooner than one year later.
>
> >> I thought the publishing time objective was within one month (+-)
> >> of announcing the end of availability. =A0:-)
>
> > And what do you get when you add those statements?
>
> I think you failed to notice the smiley.
>
No, I think Stef just forgot to add one himself.
Reply by CBFalconer●November 26, 20082008-11-26
Stef wrote:
> CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Oliver Betz wrote:
>>>
>> ... snip ...
>>>
>>> Slightly off-topic but similar: I have been sending so many
>>> reports about silicon and documentation errors to a uC
>>> manufacturer. Always hard to convince first level support that
>>> it is a bug. After being successful there, with some luck, it's
>>> published not sooner than one year later.
>>
>> I thought the publishing time objective was within one month (+-)
>> of announcing the end of availability. :-)
>
> And what do you get when you add those statements?
I think you failed to notice the smiley.
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
Reply by Stef●November 26, 20082008-11-26
In comp.arch.embedded,
CBFalconer <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Oliver Betz wrote:
>>
> ... snip ...
>>
>> Slightly off-topic but similar: I have been sending so many
>> reports about silicon and documentation errors to a uC
>> manufacturer. Always hard to convince first level support that
>> it is a bug. After being successful there, with some luck, it's
>> published not sooner than one year later.
>
> I thought the publishing time objective was within one month (+-)
> of announcing the end of availability. :-)
And what do you get when you add those statements?
EOL will be announced at least one year after you have designed-in
a component.
--
Stef (remove caps, dashes and .invalid from e-mail address to reply by mail)
Nadia Comaneci, simple perfection.
-- '76 Olympics
Reply by CBFalconer●November 25, 20082008-11-25
Oliver Betz wrote:
>
... snip ...
>
> Slightly off-topic but similar: I have been sending so many
> reports about silicon and documentation errors to a uC
> manufacturer. Always hard to convince first level support that
> it is a bug. After being successful there, with some luck, it's
> published not sooner than one year later.
I thought the publishing time objective was within one month (+-)
of announcing the end of availability. :-)
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
Reply by Chris H●November 25, 20082008-11-25
In message <gghhfr.12s.1@stefan.msgid.phost.de>, Stefan Reuther
<stefan.news@arcor.de> writes
>Chris H wrote:
>> Oliver Betz <obetz@despammed.com> writes
>>> Stefan Reuther wrote:
>>> [...support quality...]
>>>> One difference with plain OSS (i.e. not pre-packaged OSS with support
>>>> contract and price tag) here is that there is no marketing departement
>>>> trying to hide the developers from the users. A foo-devel or foo-support
>>>> mailing list accepts input from almost everyone.
>>>
>>> Ack. But "no marketing departement hiding developers from the users"
>>> is no quarantee that things will be corrected. Even developers can be
>>> uninterested, overloaded etc.
>>
>> This is true. As I have said before developers are often less interested
>> in talking to users and less tolerant than the support people
>
>Developers are usually interested in solving interesting problems
>instead of boring everyday stuff. Of course they don't want to be
>bothered every day by students with installation problems who haven't
>read the README file.
Quite
> But, hey, I'm a developer, too,
As every caller says.
> and I won't
>contact support without in advance having tried hard to solve the problem.
As every caller says.
>> I agree. The difference is the commercial packages have more of an
>> incentive to give good support. It they give bad support they loose
>> their job of the company looses sales and they loose their job etc
>
>That doesn't necessarily depend on the kind of software they sell, it
>more depends on the size of the company. A small company that is happy
>to have found a big one buying their stuff will be more cooperative than
>a big one having sold to a smaller customer, and knowing that the
>customer has no choice. Especially when there's an ocean between the
>latter two.
This is not the case. You seem very paranoid.
--
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
\/\/\/\/\ Chris Hills Staffs England /\/\/\/\/
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Reply by Walter Banks●November 25, 20082008-11-25
Stefan Reuther wrote:
> This matches our experience surprisingly close.
>
How many second tries were copied to sales?
Sales people see a problem between themselves
and their next bonus. They are people people with
the best map of the company.
Look at my list it is surprisingly effective at solving
problems quickly.
I have been on both sides of this problem. When the
clear objective is to solve a problem things can go
very quickly.
w..
Reply by Stefan Reuther●November 25, 20082008-11-25
Chris H wrote:
> Oliver Betz <obetz@despammed.com> writes
>> Stefan Reuther wrote:
>> [...support quality...]
>>> One difference with plain OSS (i.e. not pre-packaged OSS with support
>>> contract and price tag) here is that there is no marketing departement
>>> trying to hide the developers from the users. A foo-devel or foo-support
>>> mailing list accepts input from almost everyone.
>>
>> Ack. But "no marketing departement hiding developers from the users"
>> is no quarantee that things will be corrected. Even developers can be
>> uninterested, overloaded etc.
>
> This is true. As I have said before developers are often less interested
> in talking to users and less tolerant than the support people
Developers are usually interested in solving interesting problems
instead of boring everyday stuff. Of course they don't want to be
bothered every day by students with installation problems who haven't
read the README file. But, hey, I'm a developer, too, and I won't
contact support without in advance having tried hard to solve the problem.
>> , and money (support contract) can (!)
>> improve your position.
>>
>> There are tons of long standing bugs in OSS.
>
> Really@ I thought OSS bugs were fixed in minutes because everyone has
> the source. You mean it is no better than commerical software.
I think nobody claimed that. (Someone put it in those words a while ago:
nobody ever got to see my C64 BASIC exercises. Today's schoolboys'
playpen PHP accidents are sold as open-source e-commerce solutions.)
If the bug doesn't get fixed, nobody deems it important. For OSS you
could at least try to resolve the situation if you disagree with the
maintainer's view.
> I agree. The difference is the commercial packages have more of an
> incentive to give good support. It they give bad support they loose
> their job of the company looses sales and they loose their job etc
That doesn't necessarily depend on the kind of software they sell, it
more depends on the size of the company. A small company that is happy
to have found a big one buying their stuff will be more cooperative than
a big one having sold to a smaller customer, and knowing that the
customer has no choice. Especially when there's an ocean between the
latter two.
Stefan