Subject: Re: engineering counts
From: Tom Lord <lord@regexps.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 04:19:42 -0700 (PDT)



	Forrest Cavelier flatters me with:

	> You must be from Pittsburgh.

I have no affiliation with the SEI.  I do respect their work.  Thanks.


	> The overhead and delay introduced when following documented
	> processes is huge for a small gain in quality

I'm sure many of us have direct experience to the contrary.  The GCC
group is mostly trending in good directions, for example.

Yes, though, there are cost benefit trade-offs to be made when 
designing processes.  We don't immediately want space-shuttle
processes for all of space-ship earth.


	> Exposing the process in "deep and meaningful ways" will
	> be attractive to a few customers, but not a majority.  

Yes, no, maybe.  That's a marketing problem.  Value is value, and
whether or not the market recognizes it is a separate question.

One way to proceed would be to identify those customers must concerned
with such issues, today, and weigh their market sizes and strategic
value.

-t