Re: Work to the risk was Re: Inspections Was: RE: [AM] ANN: Mashing Deadly Myt

| From: Scott Ambler<[email protected]>
| 
| It's the same thing with software.  If I was working on truly critical 
| software where a mistake is costly, perhaps the control software for the 
| Mars Lander or control software for a medical device, then I'd very likely 
| insist on reviews and inspections.  In these situations the risk far 
| outweighs the cost.  In the vast majority of situations this isn't the 
| case, and frankly it makes very little sense to do inspections and reviews 
| when other practices such as pair programming, modeling with others, 
| collective ownership, ... seem to result in very high quality work anyway.
---

If you're willing to limit your scope to projects where it doesn't
matter if you deliver defects, then I can agree with you.  I've never
actually worked in such a domain, but when I write code for my own use
I wouldn't bother with arranging inspections, I would just fix problems
when they became too irritating to live with.  My perceptions are
colored by working with software delivered to customers, with both real
costs and credibility costs to escaped defects.

scott
-- 
scott preece
motorola urbana design center (il67), 1800 s. oak st., champaign, il  61820  
e-mail:	[email protected]	fax:	217-384-8550
phone:	217-384-8589	cell: 217-433-6114	pager: [email protected]

For more information about AM, visit the Agile Modeling Home Page at www.agilemodeling.com
--^----------------------------------------------------------------
This email was sent to: [email protected]

EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bUrKDA.bWnbtk.Z2NtYS1h
Or send an email to: [email protected]

TOPICA - Start your own email discussion group. FREE!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/create/index2.html
--^----------------------------------------------------------------