OT: NSI QA Dept.

[Nate Duehr]

Someone please tell them that QA shouldn't be a department and that
individual accountability works better.  (Notice it was a problem with
the PROCESS, not his fault as the manager.  I guess at least he fessed
up to the fact there there WAS a problem in a public forum of
"customers".  That's a start.)

Oh well, my company touts the same crap...

Sorry this is so OT.  I've just been working on some theories and trying
to flesh them out with personal research that the traditional QA
Department is a total waste of money in many cases, or is at least a way
for everyone to blame procedures used for testing instead of the moron
who released code they haven't even looked for bugs in.


On Fri, Jul 28, 2000 at 12:52:00PM -0700, Derek J. Balling wrote:
> 
> Because apparently "trying it out and seeing if the output is 
> sane"... isn't part of NetSol's QA process.
> 
> Anyone who is surprised, please raise your hands.
> 
> D
> 
> 
> At 3:26 PM -0400 7/28/00, Larson, Matt wrote:
> >The NSI Registry is always striving to improve the build and distribution
> >process for the zones we administer.  On Thursday, a new version of this
> >build process went into production.  Unfortunately, the information used to
> >produce the SOA RNAME field was incorrect and it slipped through our QA
> >process.  We have resolved the issue, and zones with the correct information
> >are being distributed.
> >
> >Matt Larson <mlarson at netsol.com>
> >DNS Platform Manager
> >Network Solutions Registry / www.nsiregistry.com

-- 
Nate Duehr <nate at natetech.com>

GPG Key fingerprint = DCAF 2B9D CC9B 96FA 7A6D AAF4 2D61 77C5 7ECE C1D2
Public Key available upon request, or at wwwkeys.pgp.net and others.

-- Attached file included as plaintext by Listar --

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iD8DBQE5gnTjLWF3xX7OwdIRAvNnAJ0TIjDOf9uqYPKI4VVgdC7zHKkufwCcC+Rf
+bTvczCYDIRe/5vhuRazJJw=
=bhgu
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----