3 ms·

No, absolutely not. I'm talking about the system of a single company; its customers, inputs, processes and people, and finally outputs. What do you think is th

No, absolutely not. I'm talking about the system of a single company; its customers, inputs, processes and people, and finally outputs. What do you think is the scope any one company is responsible for? Is there something about the quality of their output that they are not responsible for? I'm not saying bug-free software is the goal, and maybe I'm too far off on a tangent to still be relevant to this conversation—just trying to get across that bugs come from somewhere, you should think about what all that "somewhere" is by looking at the complex system surrounding it, and you should not punish your developers or put them under the metaphorical bridge to hold them accountable for not producing bugs. That is ridiculous and ignorant of the system, and the system between and around people—not the individuals themselves—are where bugs come from.

dllthomas 11y ago
"What do you think is the scope any one company is responsible for? Is there something about the quality of their output that they are not responsible for?" They are not responsible for the output of other companies. My question was whether you were speaking to what one company could do, or what was prevalent in the development ecosystem. It seems that you were speaking to the former. I certainly don't hold a position that there are no gains to be had focusing on the system. I do think it is most reasonable to say we don't know how to attain them in a way that acheives quality (or specifically lack of defects) at the level envisioned up-thread. The ways we do already know to attain that level of quality do impose substantial cost. (And for the record, I certainly agree that individual punishment of developers is unlikely to get us to any better place.)