LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.0

Help for TEAM-ADA Archives


TEAM-ADA Archives

TEAM-ADA Archives


TEAM-ADA@LISTSERV.ACM.ORG


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

TEAM-ADA Home

TEAM-ADA Home

TEAM-ADA  May 1997

TEAM-ADA May 1997

Subject:

TA97 Submission: "SEPR Panel"

From:

"Hal Hart (Hal Hart)" <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Hal Hart <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 16 May 1997 11:59:19 -0700

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (77 lines)

  PANEL PROPOSAL:  "SEPRs  --  Better for Ada Than the Mandate??"


        PANEL MODERATOR:  Hal Hart (TRW; Past Chair of SIGAda)
        PANELISTS:
                Maretta Holden  (Boeing; NRC Ada Study Committee member)
                Others TBD (hh will recruit &/or PC give me recommendations)


PANEL OVERVIEW: The 1996 "Ada and Beyond: Software Policies for the
DoD" study by the National Research Council (NRC) recommended the
implementation of a new major DoD-enforced milestone called the
"Software Engineering Plan Review" (SEPG) for all system acquisitions
and establishment of a SEPR Boards to conduct these reviews in
complete and consistent manners.  An SEPR will simultaneously review
several inter-related software lifecycle and cost decisions that have
a greater overall influence on software capability than does choice of
a particular programming language alone.  Factors to be considered
include system/software architecture, design methods, reuse (including
legacy code impacts), development process, development environment,
programming language, etc.  The SEPR process is intended to help
Government program managers (and possibly contractors) achieve a
best-practices level of decision making for the software engineering
associated with major systems, as well as to assure consideration of
organizational and lifecycle factors.  The NRC committee noted that
analogous holistic software engineering decision processes, sometimes
called "architecture reviews" but encompassing wider scope than that
name literally says, are already standard practice in several
commercial organizations recognized as best-practice leaders.

Although DoD policy makers rejected a separate NRC recommendation that
Ada be retained as a requirement for DoD warfighting systems, the SEPR
recommendation has not only been embraced but has become the single
highlighted point made in new DoD policy being implemented in 1997.
In initiating this policy to totally drop DoD's Ada requirement,
Assistant Secretary of Defense Emmett Paige, Jr., has continually
voiced his intent that the DoD is not giving up on Ada, and his beliefs
that the new policy will help Ada and that correctly done SEPRs will
come to decisions to use Ada more than its "share" of the time.

The objectives of this panel are to:
 (1) present some glimpses and assessments of SEPR-like processes from a couple
     organizations that have already instituted architecture reviews or
     other similar multi-factor software engineering decision processes;
 (2) gather and present evidence reflecting on Ada's prospects of
     thriving in an SEPR-based acquisition climate;
 (3) debate the proposition that SEPRs will eventually be better for
     Ada's fate than the previous policy.


PANELISTS:  generically, a mix will be sought including at least
the following perspectives, presuming that some panelists can
represent more than one of these perspectives:
  o NRC Ada study committee (Maretta Holden has committed to be on the
    panel);
  o representative(s) from organizations with a history of SEPR-like
    activities (whether or not Ada has actually been a serious candidate
    on the table);
  o a Gov't spokesman who can give an update on SEPR implementation;
  o a proponent of the position that dropping the Ada requirement is
    not in the DoD's and Ada's best interests, considering both Gov't
    contracted and commercial software activities;
  o a proponent of the position that the new policy is in the DoD's
    and Ada's best interests, considering both Gov't contracted and
    commercial software activities, and that SEPRs are part of the reason
    for this optimistic viewpoint.


- - - - - - -

PS:  Those on cc of this message are encouraged to submit to me names
of candidate panelists fitting any of the above quals  --  particularly
I am seeking industry contacts for "Archtecture Review Boards" or other
SEPR-like activities in those companies that have a history of doing
them.  Better yet, companies that also choose to use Ada (at least
sometimes.  :-)

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
June 2007
May 2007
March 2007
February 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LISTSERV.ACM.ORG

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager