| |||||||||||
The point was to look at development codeThe point was to look at development codePosted Jul 10, 2003 3:54 UTC (Thu) by iabervon (subscriber, #722)Parent article: Reasoning is, as was mentioned, doing this primarily as a method for demonstrating their software. For this reason, they're following people's suggestions for what to look at, and they did the Apache study in response to people who responded to the first study by asking how less mature Open Source code did. I suspect that they've now gotten feedback that they should study how Apache 2.1 does as it stabilizes. Of course, I suspect that Reasoning's method is not really useful for repeat application, since the Apache team will probably now fix all of the bugs that Reasoning found. The basis for these studies making any sense at all is that more subtle issues seem to correlate with these simple errors. But, of course, the subtle errors don't go away when you fix the simple ones, so the correlation fails to hold for code which has already been auditted for simple errors.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|||||||||||