RE: [sc] cost of software safety for non-human-rated missions



RE: [sc] cost of software safety for non-human-rated missions

From: Scott Nowell <snowell_at_xxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 11:17:51 -0700
Message-ID: <284525B9F252A445BC26E6DDC34B2171074146@xxxxxx>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: safety-critical-request@xxxxxx 
> [mailto:safety-critical-request@xxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
> MellorPeter@xxxxxx
> Sent: Friday, March 02, 2007 10:59 AM
> To: safety-critical@xxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [sc] cost of software safety for non-human-rated missions
> 
> In a message dated 02/03/2007 09:19:38 GMT Standard Time, 
> alexander.mclellan@xxxxxx writes:
> 
> > Thanks for that info.
> > The key question, to me, is
> > 
> >   "QA? or Not QA? Who does the testing?"
> 
> My understanding has always been that testing is QC, not QA.  
> 
> Peter
> 

Possibly semantics.  In our company testing is done by the SQA group.

If the question was "who does the testing, 'QA' (QA, SQA, QC, etc.) or
the developers" then the answer should always be 'QA'.

The developers job is to make the software work.  The testers job is to
try to prove that it doesn't.

Two very different jobs with two very different mindsets.

Scott
----------------------------------------------------------------------- 
Scott Nowell 
Validated Software Corporation 
2590 Trailridge Drive East - Suite 102
Lafayette, CO 80026 
Tel: (303) 531-5290 
http://www.validatedsoftware.com
Received on Fri 02 Mar 2007 - 18:17:00 GMT