So the original developer writes crap code (whether as a result of burn-out and exhaustion, or just that is the level of talent they have), and the fault for that code almost making it into the kernel is a lack of review, without any responsibility on the coder? And then, once the issue has been identified and the process criticised, the people who gave that person the ability to post such crap code are more focussed on being upset about the criticism than they are about addressing the code and quality issue
> So the original developer writes crap code (whether as a result of burn-out and exhaustion, or just that is the level of talent they have), and the fault for that code almost making it into the kernel is a lack of review, without any responsibility on the coder?
Yes. The problem is that crap code gets into the OS. If your system is dependent on every programmer being really good, all the time, and never making any mistakes, your system sucks. You need to fix the system.
CMMI and similar are quite passé, for many good reasons. But the general concept of having an auditable design control process is not. It need be possible to understand what piece of code is intended to do and how it was tested, without a lot of effort. There needs to be a process of assessing readiness of code before it is allowed into a release, that is more robust that relying on both the competence and good intentions of any individual.
"Not my monkeys, not my circus" (Score:5, Interesting)
So the original developer writes crap code (whether as a result of burn-out and exhaustion, or just that is the level of talent they have), and the fault for that code almost making it into the kernel is a lack of review, without any responsibility on the coder?
And then, once the issue has been identified and the process criticised, the people who gave that person the ability to post such crap code are more focussed on being upset about the criticism than they are about addressing the code and quality issue
Yes The distro is much bigger than one programmer (Score:4, Insightful)
> So the original developer writes crap code (whether as a result of burn-out and exhaustion, or just that is the level of talent they have), and the fault for that code almost making it into the kernel is a lack of review, without any responsibility on the coder?
Yes. The problem is that crap code gets into the OS.
If your system is dependent on every programmer being really good, all the time, and never making any mistakes, your system sucks. You need to fix the system.
You could say this particular pers
Re:Yes The distro is much bigger than one programm (Score:2)
CMMI and similar are quite passé, for many good reasons. But the general concept of having an auditable design control process is not. It need be possible to understand what piece of code is intended to do and how it was tested, without a lot of effort. There needs to be a process of assessing readiness of code before it is allowed into a release, that is more robust that relying on both the competence and good intentions of any individual.