The result itself is unsurprising, but I'm curious of what caused their low bug rate ("code quality" in their term). They haven't looked at the actual code, but

The result itself is unsurprising, but I'm curious of what caused their low bug rate ("code quality" in their term). They haven't looked at the actual code, but I guess that code consistency plays a big role for reducing potential bugs, and it's easily achieved with having fewer developers in a team. Also this is not contradictory to sayings like "a lot of eyeballs make software better" because I believe eyeballs mainly contribute to bug detection, but not bug prevention. Edit: After posting this, I dug into this problem a bit more. I think code consistency is less important between modules (in a large project). But this requires a premise that these modules are independent enough and they don't need much communication each other. This line of thought is pointed out by this SO question. https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/190649/whats-the-right-balance-between-code-consistency-and-code-improvement/190658#190658 https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/1906...