A Framework For Quality Assurance?

Midh Mulpuri asks: "These days licenses like GPL, MPL and QPL make it easy for developers to release software as open source without the hassle of having to write up "TERMS and CONDITIONS" for each project. While the software is released as open source, it is mostly released with no warranty whatsoever. That is reasonable considering the software is often 'free'. Major projects often find service providers offering fee-based support. But for most part, the burden of providing service falls on the community and the developers. Further, there is no quality assurance other than the reputation of the project (and the developers). While for many this is enough assurance, the lack of warranty and quality assurance might still leave some people uncomfortable. To make 'free' software more appealing we would need a better way to assure quality. The greatest quality assurance for software is the developer. A framework should be developed to make it easier for the developer to assure users of quality." Does Open Source really need a framework for Quality Assurance?

"This framework might include:

1. A "General Practice Agreement" or "Ethics Agreement" that states ground rules for open source projects and programmers in general. (I am using the word Agreement lacking a better word). This would be like the contracts that bind lawyers, doctors, architects and other professionals. Developers could sign the "Agreement" by placing a graphic on their site.
2. Self-test guidelines. The guidelines would include a checklist that needs to be completed before any production release.
3. Documenting results of the self-test on the project site and/or distributing the test suite with the software.

Most projects already have some form of testing. Documenting and publishing these tests would add to the credibility of the project. An ethics standard might be a more difficult issue. How would you come up with an ethics standard that is acceptable to all? A statement like "I shall document my code well" or " I shall make my software extensible and customizable" would be easy to adhere to. "I shall base my work on industry standards (when possible)" might not appeal to all programmers.

Such a framework would need the backing of prominent open source programmers to be developed and implemented. I believe that the assurance of quality would bring more respect to open source and open source programmers. If such a framework already exists (and escaped my well traveled mouse) please let me know. Otherwise, I request the Slashdot community to kick start the development of such a framework. What should a "General Practice Agreement" contain? What would be good self-test guidelines?"

Comments

Huh? Don't think so

[Vanders]

The best person to assure quality is the developer? No chance! I assume you've never worked in a commercial development enviroment?

As a QA tester, i can assure you that a developer is not the best person to assure quality. They just don't see their own bugs, or code that isn't to spec. (This may not always apply to OSS projects). The only person who can assure quality is a third party (Non developer), who does a full QA test on it. Trust me on this one.