Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [XP] Re: safety critical software

Expand Messages
  • Keith Ray
    I did a web-search on Nasa SEL (Software Engineering Laboratory) and found this so-called gold practice of inch-peoples , which sound a bit like xp
    Message 1 of 12 , Jun 13, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      I did a web-search on "Nasa SEL" (Software Engineering Laboratory) and
      found this so-called "gold" practice of "inch-peoples", which sound a
      bit like xp stories...



      "defining completion criteria for each task in the lowest-level
      activity network as gates that assess either the quality of the
      products produced, or the adequacy and completeness of the finished
      process, and then tracking completion at the binary level (done or not

      "Decompose tasks to the inch-pebble level,
      Verify that tasks produce a tangible product"

      "The concept of “inch-pebbles” has been presented in a variety of
      definitions in the literature. Some authors purport that an
      inch-pebble is a task (or sub-task) that can be completed in a day.
      Others describe an inch-pebble in more relative terms, indicating that
      as a general rule it should be not more than 5% of the project
      duration and that at least 95% of the task can be performed by a
      single “lowest level” organization."

      "Establish objective acceptance criteria and tests for determining
      that the output of a scheduled task is acceptable and the task is,
      therefore, complete. This ensures that all participants are clear on
      the success factors and also promotes accountability for completion.
      Although multiple criteria may exist for a task, the task is not
      considered complete unless all of the criteria are met."

      On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 9:30 PM, Phlip<phlip2005@...> wrote:
      > BTW I suspect the space shuttle software is written via TDD and pair
      > programming, except they call it "design by contract", and the biggest
      > difference is several layers of redundancy. Separate QA groups for the black-box
      > tests, an entire separate team writing all the same software twice, for the
      > back-up computer, etc.
      > I have not read up on this, but I would suspect the part that feels like XP are
      > the individual programmers behaviors...
      >  - write the contracts as you write the contracted code
      >  - constantly tune a build environment that rapidly proofs everything
      >  - 30 hour work weeks & pairing
      >  - constantly challenge the design specification
      > Someone check out if I'm wrong. If so, someone needs some learning. Is Bil Kleb
      > in the house?
      > --
      >   Phlip
      > ------------------------------------
      > To Post a message, send it to:   extremeprogramming@...
      > To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: extremeprogramming-unsubscribe@...
      > ad-free courtesy of objectmentor.comYahoo! Groups Links

      C. Keith Ray, IXP Coach, Industrial Logic, Inc.
      http://industriallogic.com 866-540-8336 (toll free)
      Groove with our Agile Greatest Hits: http://www.industriallogic.com/elearning/
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.