It almost sounds like we want to reward the WGs which complete their work
while producing the _least_ amount of documentation. If we assume that a
document is "good" and "complete" then the most concise representation
should be the easiest to work with.
Ok... So I'm being a little idealistic, but this is different that just
saying "Me too" to the "We ain't makin' widgets" responses. Optimally we
should judge the work of a WG based on how well its output is accepted by
the world at large, but that's a little late in the process.
mark--------------------------
At 3/28/02 16:01, Bill Strahm wrote:
I am reminded that early in my career I was in a company that was driven by
the
KLOC metric. They had determined that the product would have 150ish KLOC
in it
and so had every programmer report the number of KLOC they had contributed
that week.
One week I was looking through the code I had inherited and realized that I
had two
copies of a set of utilities that did the same code. I spent a day or two
removing
one set, and porting that half of code to use the other set of utilities
(Basically
I had inherited two developers code). Well my KLOC for the week was
somewhere in
the -10 range, and it was a month before I started going positive again. My
reviews
sucked, but it was the right thing to do.
Becareful what you measure, because that is the behaviour you will get
Bill