Hacker News Reader

Comment by 9659 | Hacker News Reader

About 2000, Software QA (and almost all traditional QA activities) were changed. The focus was on process over inspection. "Design in quality, do not inspect it into the product"

Suppliers (to include software) were expected to manage the quality of the product they provided; the purchaser would focus on how they managed the process, not in the compliance of every part.

This had a chance until software process was tossed in the name of "agile".

View on HN

I recall a bug I was involved with at a telecoms equipment market in the early 2000s. The bug only showed up in our biggest base stations in high load situations. We diagnosed the bug, and there were a couple of parts to it. Sloppy software design in an optional hardware module (no state machine) was one part - and was fixed. But there was another underlying issue in the way message queues were handled.

Anyhow, the fix for this was created and written. But we never got to put it into production. The reason: the company didn't have a lab test facility that could put a sufficient load on the software to prove it. Even though we were getting field failures because of this issue that were getting a bad rep, we couldn't fix it because even though the old code was known to be buggy, we couldn't prove the new code. So the process said we couldn't ship it.

Another way of looking at that is that within the ability to test, the implementations were indistinguishable, so the process mandated that the older implementation must be used. I wonder if they would have explicitly specified age as a metric if this was considered when designing the process.

Here's a stupid question: How do you know your process is good unless you inspect it?

"Hey Bob I know you're a competent engineer, but don't worry about specifying a certain type of bolt or loctite, the untrained assembly personnel will figure it out. I'm sure they won't let 200 people die in a plane crash."

Make it impossible to use a wrong bolt, and train the assembly workers.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com