The way Linux and other open-source projects have been developed do not belong to any of the 'traditional,formal S/W development life cycles'(water-cycle model,etc). These are just evolving models. The metrics reliability & quality (if thats what they mean by trustedness)of a s/w are defenitely not judged just by "how many people are working and how many bugs have been debugged",but they are like how easily can we detect/fix a bug?how easily can we make modifications? etc. Thats what the CMM is also about. All that he's trying to say is that if a s/w devpt. life cycle was rigorously followed, probably most of these bugs would not have arised. But neverthless, this could be a new model of s/w development!!
Slashdot Mirror
The way Linux and other open-source projects have been developed do not belong to any of the 'traditional,formal S/W development life cycles'(water-cycle model,etc). These are just evolving models. The metrics reliability & quality (if thats what they mean by trustedness)of a s/w are defenitely not judged just by "how many people are working and how many bugs have been debugged",but they are like how easily can we detect/fix a bug?how easily can we make modifications? etc. Thats what the CMM is also about.
All that he's trying to say is that if a s/w devpt. life cycle was rigorously followed, probably most of these bugs would not have arised.
But neverthless, this could be a new model of s/w development!!